The target articles explore a common hypothesis pertaining to whether perceptually degrading materials will improve reasoning, memory, and metamemory. Outcomes are mixed, yet some evidence was garnered in support of a version of the disfluency hypothesis that includes moderators, and along with evidence from prior research, researchers will likely continue to explore the impact of disfluency on reasoning and learning. Toward this end, evidence and discussion from the target articles also suggest recommendations--both explicitly and implicitly--about how to explore this effect: (a) treat disfluency as a hypothesis to be tested and evaluate the disfluency hypothesis against alternatives; (b) pursue multiple replications of any disfluency effects; (c) attempt to measure differences in processing fluency across conditions; and (d) resist labeling manipulated variables with theoretically-laden terms. We expand on these recommendations in the present commentary.