The aim of the paper is to analyse the illusion of knowing in metacognitive monitoring of the learning activity of university students (n = 262). The analysis focuses on the effects of the different types of information proposed and of personal, cognitive, metacognitive, and individual psychological characteristics of the participants. The research has shown that the illusion of knowing can occur in all types of metacognitive judgments, but is more evident in prospective judgments and depends on the type of information, its length and style, task type, etc. There are empirically established correlations between the selected personal, cognitive, and metacognitive characteristics. Gender and age differences in the manifestation of the illusion of knowing are not observed, although it is found that women tend towards overconfidence. The results also showed that the illusion of knowing is more typical for younger students, especially for those with lower levels of academic achievements.

Purpose. The paper is focused on the theoretical analysis of some theoretical and methodological aspects of the relationship between metacognitive monitoring accuracy and learning achievement success of university students. In particular, we highlight some approaches to the relation between metacognitive monitoring accuracy and learning achievement success that is a quite common problem in the university learning activity. Methods. The theoretical and comparative methods of studying metacognitive monitoring accuracy and learning achievement success of university students have been used in the study. The necessity in studying some theoretical and methodological aspects of the notion has been caused by the impact of metacognitive monitoring accuracy on students’ learning activities. Results. The study aimed at revealing the role of metacognitive monitoring in the university learning activity, studying the extent to which changes in monitoring cause changes in the nature of the students’ control over their own cognitive activities, specifying the nature of relationship between levels of confidence and students successes in learning, etc. A noteworthy finding is that students are generally overconfident in their self-assessments and this overconfidence effect is greatest for students of poorer abilities as they are doubly cursed: they lack knowledge of the material, and lack the awareness of the knowledge that they do and do not possess. The erroneous belief that information is understood when it is not is regarded as the illusion of knowing or overconfidence in knowing; the notion can be a significant obstacle to the effectiveness of the learning activities. Conclusions. The results of the analysis found in the study can play an important role in the process of understanding the relationship between metacognitive monitoring accuracy and learning achievement success of university students.

The paper tries to contribute to better understanding of the reliability of metacognitive monitoring. The research is centred in a precise theoretical framework of motivation in metacognitive monitoring of the learning activity of university students(n = 262; M = 19,5; SD = 1,87). Moreover, we aimed to study the role of the learning motivation in such metacognitive monitoring error as the illusion of knowing.To diagnose the role of the learning motivation in metacognitive monitoring reliability a method of motivation diagnosis by Ilyina (2003) was used provided by the study of the structure of motivation in the university activity. The results of the empirical study of the learning motivation in metacognitive monitoring are highlighted. In particular, the results show that among the most important characteristics, student motivation is aimed to provide better understanding of the nature of metacognitive monitoring reliability and can help in the annihilation of the negative impact of the illusion of knowing on metacognitive monitoring of the university learning activity. Those students who were focused on knowledge performed accurate metacognitive judgements. However, among the students targeted for occupation the accuracy of metacognitive monitoring was the highest (MaJOL = -.006; SD = .01; MaRCJ = -.006; SD = .02; MJOL = .03; SD = .02; MRCJ = .00; SD = .01) (p = .05). Possible prospectives of future investigations of the problem are also described.

The paper highlights possible causes and consequences of the illusion of knowing in metacognitive monitoring of the learning activity of university students through the effects of different types of information proposed, and also of personal, cognitive, metacognitive, and individual psychological characteristics of university students (n = 262; M = 19,5; SD = 1,87). According to the results, the illusion of knowing occurring mostly in prospective judgements of learning can be caused by the type of information (it was higher in the statements), task type (it appeared in multiple-choice questions), text length (its levels were higher in larger texts) and style (overconfidence occurred while learning the texts of the belletristic style). Female students tended towards slight overconfidence and the illusion of knowing was more typical for younger students with lower levels of academic achievements. Possible consequences of the phenomenon, ways of its annihilation, and further avenues for research are also described.

Purpose. The paper is aimed to analyze some key features of the illusion of not knowing in metacognitive monitoring of the learning activity of university students. Among the main conceptions of the influence of the illusion of not knowing on metacognitive monitoring accuracy of the learning activity of university students we tend to study and to analyse different types of the learned information, as well as personal, cognitive, metacognitive, and individual psychological characteristics of students. Moreover, the study may allow to clarifying the phenomenon of the illusion of not knowing and its influence on metacognitive monitoring accuracy measures. Methods. The theoretical and comparative practical methods of studying the illusion of not knowing in metacognitive monitoring of university students have been used in the study. The participants learned texts, statements and pairs of words in Ukrainian. They performed JOLs, aJOLs, RCJs, and aRCJs. Calibration procedure helped to define average indicators of both the illusion of knowing and the illusion of not knowing. Results. The findings indicate that the illusion of not knowing as an error of metacognitive monitoring accuracy (alongside the illusion of knowing) can occur in all types of metacognitive judgments, especially in the prospective judgments of learning. The highest levels of the illusion of not knowing are shown in learning pairs of words, smaller texts of all styles, and in ‘Yes’/‘No’/‘Do not know’ questions. Moreover, the effects of personal, cognitive, metacognitive, and individual psychological characteristics are also allocated. Conclusions. The paper provides an account of the effects of different types of information chosen for the experiment, and of personal, cognitive, metacognitive, and individual psychological characteristics of university students. The findings indicate the illusion of not knowing as an error of metacognitive monitoring accuracy alongside the illusion of knowing. These findings might help to solve the problem of metacognitive monitoring accuracy in the learning activity of university students.