Previous literature suggests learners can adjust their encoding strategies to match the demands of the expected test format. However, it is unclear whether other forms of metacognitive control, namely, study time allocation and restudy selection, are also sensitive to expected test format. Across four experiments we examined whether learners qualitatively adjust their allocation of study time (Experiment 1) and restudy selections (Experiments 2a, 2b, and 3) when expecting a more difficult generative memory test (i.e., cued-recall) as compared to a less difficult non-generative memory test (i.e., forced-choice recognition). Counter to our predictions, we found little evidence that learners shift their study time allocation and restudy selection choices toward easier material when expecting a relatively more difficult cued recall test, even after acquiring experience with each test format. Instead, based on exploratory analyses conducted post-hoc, learners appeared to rely heavily on the success with which they retrieved associated studied information at the time that restudy selections were solicited. Moreover, counter to some extant models of self-regulated learning, learners tended to first choose difficult rather than easy items when making their restudy selections, regardless of expected test format. Together, these novel findings place new constraints on our current understanding of learners' metacognitive sensitivity to expected test format, and have important implications for current theoretical accounts of self-regulated learning.