A Source Of Metacomprehension Inaccuracy

Moore, DeWayne; Lin-Agler, Lin Miao; Zabrucky, Karen M.

doi:10.1080/02702710590962578

Cited by 25 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Some researchers have found that adult readers base their metacomprehension judgments on experiences with current tasks (e.g., Morris 1990;Rawson and Dunlosky 2002). However, there is also evidence suggesting that adult readers base metacomprehension judgments on pre-formed expectations of performance affected by factors such as preexisting selfperceptions of ability (e.g., Hacker et al 2000;Moore et al 2005). In the following section these studies are reviewed in detail.…”

Section: Processes Underlying Metacomprehension Judgmentsmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Basing judgments on pre-formed performance expectations Some researchers have provided evidence suggesting that adult readers may largely base metacomprehension judgments on enduring self-perceptions of ability which pre-shape their performance expectations (e.g., Hacker et al 2000;Moore et al 2005). Hacker et al (2000) examined how judgments of performance and actual performance on prior exams influence judgments of performance on subsequent exams in a college classroom.…”

Section: Processes Underlying Metacomprehension Judgmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In another study Moore et al (2005) used a path model analysis to examine the relations among judgments of comprehension performance and actual performance within and across three reading trials. Before the three evaluated trials, which were trials 10, 11, and 12, readers gained experience with the task across nine trials.…”

Section: Processes Underlying Metacomprehension Judgmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Researchers have also investigated the bases of metacomprehension judgments to shed light on how readers usually make their judgments (e.g., Maki and Serra 1992;Moore et al 2005;Rawson and Dunlosky 2002). How metacomprehension judgments are made is at least partly responsible for judgment accuracy.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Adult Metacomprehension: Judgment Processes and Accuracy Constraints

Zhao

Linderholm

2008

Educ Psychol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this paper is to review and synthesize two interrelated topics in the adult metacomprehension literature: the bases of metacomprehension judgment and the constraints on metacomprehension accuracy. Our review shows that adult readers base their metacomprehension judgments on different types of information, including experiences with current tasks and pre-formed expectations of performance affected by factors such as self-perception of ability. We propose a model that shows the anchoring and adjustment mechanism (Tversky and Kahneman, Science 185:1124-1130, 1974) underlies metacomprehension judgments. Specifically, due to test uncertainty, people may judge future comprehension performance by starting with an anchor such as pre-formed performance expectations and then (insufficiently) adjust away from it based on experiences with current tasks. This anchoring and adjustment model of metacomprehension judgment sheds light on what constrains metacomprehension accuracy. We conclude that two main accuracy constraints are the anchoring effect and the poor diagnostic validity of experiential cues. Based on the review, we discuss avenues for future research that will further our understanding of the mechanisms underlying metacomprehension.Keywords Metacomprehension judgment . Anchoring and adjustment . Metacomprehension accuracy . Reading comprehension Consider a college student who is studying for an upcoming test. After studying, the student may ask himself or herself, "How well have I mastered the materials?" and "How well will I do on my test?" Assessing learning outcomes and judging future test performance are examples of metacognition. One key way to enhance student performance is to facilitate good metacognition. But what, precisely, does the term metacognition mean?Metacognition refers to "any knowledge or cognitive activity that takes as its object, or regulates, any aspect of any cognitive enterprise" (Flavell 1985). More specifically, Nelson Educ Psychol Rev (

show abstract

Section: Processes Underlying Metacomprehension Judgmentsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Processes Underlying Metacomprehension Judgmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Processes Underlying Metacomprehension Judgmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 98%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Adult Metacomprehension: Judgment Processes and Accuracy Constraints

Zhao

Linderholm

2008

Educ Psychol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of course, gamma can be used for metric data as well, since it is a more conservative measure than r. Moreover, one could use Kim's d xy when ties on the judgments are not forced by the procedure of data collection (Gonzalez & Nelson, 1996). Nevertheless, all of the measures have been used in past research with confidence judgments-for example, bias (see, e.g., Maki, 1998) and absolute bias (e.g., Nietfeld & Schraw, 2002) as measures of absolute accuracy, and Pearson's r (e.g., Glenberg, Sanocki, Epstein, & Morris, 1987), gamma (e.g., Dunlosky, Rawson, & Middleton, 2005), and d (e.g., Tobias & Everson, 2000) as measures of relative accuracy. Measures of absolute accuracy in particular are favored by researchers working in classroom settings (see, e.g., Hacker, Bol, & Bahbahani, 2008;Nietfeld, Cao, & Osborne, 2005).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of confidence judgments: Stability and generality in the learning process and predictive validity for learning outcome

Mengelkamp

Bannert

2010

Memory & Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What Makes Learners Overestimate Their Text Comprehension? The Impact of Learner Characteristics on Judgment Bias

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is frequently assumed that learner characteristics (e.g., reading skill, self-perceptions, optimism) account for overestimations of text comprehension, which threaten learning success. However, previous findings are heterogenous. To circumvent a key problem of previous research, we considered cognitive, metacognitive, motivational, and personality characteristics of learners (N = 255) simultaneously with regard to their impact on the judgment biases in prediction and postdiction judgments about factual and inference questions. The main results for the factual questions showed that men, lower reading skill, working memory capacity, and topic knowledge, yet higher self-perceptions of cognitive and metacognitive capacities yielded stronger overestimations for prediction judgments. For inference questions, a lower reading skill, higher self-perceptions of metacognitive capacities, and a higher self-efficacy were related to stronger overestimations for prediction and postdiction judgments. A higher openness was a risk factor for stronger overestimations when making predictions for the inference questions. The findings demonstrate that learner characteristics are a relevant source of judgment bias, which should be incorporated explicitly in theories of judgment accuracy. At the same time, fewer learner characteristics were actually relevant than previous research suggests. Moreover, which learner characteristics impact judgment bias also depends on task requirements, such as factual versus inference questions.

show abstract

A Source Of Metacomprehension Inaccuracy

Cited by 25 publications

References 18 publications

Adult Metacomprehension: Judgment Processes and Accuracy Constraints

Adult Metacomprehension: Judgment Processes and Accuracy Constraints

Accuracy of confidence judgments: Stability and generality in the learning process and predictive validity for learning outcome

What Makes Learners Overestimate Their Text Comprehension? The Impact of Learner Characteristics on Judgment Bias

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About