College students in a lower-division psychology course made metacognitive judgments by predicting and postdicting performance for true-false, multiple-choice, and fill-in-the-blank question sets on each of three exams. This study investigated which question format would result in the most accurate metacognitive judgments. Extending Koriat's (1997) cue-utilization framework to these judgments, each format gave students different cues on which to base judgments. Further, each format has different probabilities of correctly guessing, which can skew accuracy. Students reported the lowest estimates for fill-in-the-blank questions. Accuracy measured using bias scores showed students' predictions and postdictions were most accurate for multiple-choice items. Accuracy measured using gamma correlations showed students' predictions were most accurate for multiple-choice items and postdictions were most accurate for fill-in-the-blank items. Based on the findings, educators are encouraged to consider what implications question format have on metacognitive processes when testing students over studied material. And, for researchers, the findings support the use of different accuracy measures to get a more detailed understanding of factors influencing metacognitive judgment accuracy.