Perspective matters: The internal/external frame of reference model for self- and peer ratings of achievement

Lösch, Thomas; Kelava, Augustin; Nagengast, Benjamin; Trautwein, Ulrich; Lüdtke, Oliver

doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.05.001

Cited by 7 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, future research clearly needs to distinguish whether students judge their performance before or after test completion, as domain-specific and academic selfconcept explained more variance for predictions. Using our results as a starting point, a promising prospect for future research seems to be to conceptually and empirically combine research on selfconcept with research on metacognitive judgments (Lösch et al 2017).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Over and above the well-known-effect of performance (Kruger and Dunning 1999), self-concept significantly contributed to judgments. While previous research has pointed to relations between self-concept and calibration (Lösch et al 2017), the current work is the first to study the relationship of self-concept with different metacognitive judgments and measures. Across studies, we showed that with higher self-concept, students provided higher and more overestimated judgments, which is in line with model assumptions by Kröner and Biermann (2007) and others.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Higher scores in self-concept or self-efficacy should be correlated with higher metacognitive judgments as all three constructs are based on judgments of personal competence (Ackerman et al 2002;Lösch et al 2017;Stankov et al 2012). There is some empirical evidence on the relevance of self-concept for judgments.…”

Section: Individual Differences In Metacognitive Judgmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Individual differences in local and global metacognitive judgments

Händel

Bruin

Dresel

2020

Metacognition Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extensive research has been conducted to understand how accurately students monitor their studying and performance via metacognitive judgments. Moreover, the bases of students' metacognitive judgments are of interest. While previous results are quite consistent regarding the importance of performance for the accuracy of metacognitive judgments, results regarding motivational and personality variables are rather heterogeneous. This paper reports on two studies that simultaneously examined the predictive power of several performance, motivational, and personality variables on metacognitive judgments. The studies investigated a set of judgments (local and global postdictions in Study 1 and global pre-and postdictions in Study 2) and accuracy scores (bias, sensitivity, and specificity) in two different settings. Individual differences in judgments and judgment accuracy were studied via hierarchical regression analyses. Study 1 with N = 245 undergraduate students identified performance and domain-specific self-concept as relevant predictors for judgments after test taking. This was consistently found for local and global judgments. Study 2 with N = 138 undergraduate students hence focused on domain-specific self-concept and extended results to predictions. Study 2 replicated results for global postdictions but not predictions. Specifically, before task processing, students' judgments relied mostly on domain-specific self-concept but not on test performance itself. The studies indicate that different judgments and measures of judgment accuracy are needed to obtain comprehensive insights into individual differences in metacognitive monitoring.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Individual Differences In Metacognitive Judgmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Individual differences in local and global metacognitive judgments

Händel

Bruin

Dresel

2020

Metacognition Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…None of these studies found support for the classic I/E model relations: Although all studies found (usually strong) positive social comparison effects, the dimensional comparison effects were either nonsignificant or even positive. However, the dimensional comparison effects depended on the rater: Whereas positive dimensional comparison effects were only found in those studies examining teachers’ and peers’ ratings (Lösch et al, 2017; Marsh et al, 1984; Pohlmann et al, 2004), the dimensional comparison effects in the studies examining parents’ ratings tended to become negative (Dai, 2002; Van Zanden et al, 2017).…”

Section: Comparison Effects On External Assessments Of Students’ Comp...mentioning

confidence: 98%

“…However, some studies of the classic I/E model allow making careful predictions about the strength of the social and dimensional comparison effects on external assessments of students’ competencies in the 2I/E model. In these studies, researchers have examined the classic I/E model (in the math and verbal subject areas) with students’ competencies rated by students’ parents (Dai, 2002; Van Zanden et al, 2017), teachers (Marsh, Smith, & Barnes, 1984; Pohlmann, Möller, & Streblow, 2004), and peers (Lösch, Kelava, Nagengast, Trautwein, & Lüdtke, 2017; Marsh et al, 1984; Pohlmann et al, 2004). None of these studies found support for the classic I/E model relations: Although all studies found (usually strong) positive social comparison effects, the dimensional comparison effects were either nonsignificant or even positive.…”

Section: Comparison Effects On External Assessments Of Students’ Comp...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Social, dimensional, and temporal comparisons by students and parents: An investigation of the 2I/E model at the transition from elementary to junior high school.

Wolff

Wigfield

Möller

et al. 2020

Journal of Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present research examined the joint effects of social, dimensional, and temporal comparisons on students’ academic self-concepts and parents’ beliefs about their children’s competencies during students’ transition phase from elementary school to junior high school. To this end, we tested the newly developed 2I/E model using longitudinal data including 2,417 students between Grades 6 and 7 and 1,846 parents. We found strong social comparison effects and moderate dimensional and temporal comparison effects on students’ self-concepts. In line with our assumption that students should be particularly sensitive to changes in their achievements during phases of school transition, the temporal comparison effects were stronger than in any prior study of the 2I/E model. Parents’ ratings of their children’s competencies were also predicted by social, dimensional, and temporal comparisons. However, whereas the social comparison effects on students’ and parents’ ratings were equally strong, the dimensional and temporal comparison effects were stronger on students’ ratings. We finally tested how social, dimensional, and temporal comparisons affected changes in students’ self-concepts and parents’ competence beliefs over 1 year. Although the effects of all 3 comparisons were still significant, we found drastic changes in their strengths, with the strongest effects on changes in competence beliefs occurring for temporal comparisons. Overall, our study provides a variety of new insights into the impact of comparison processes on the formation of competence beliefs. In particular, it emphasizes the role of temporal comparisons. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

show abstract

Ten Years of Dimensional Comparison Theory: On the Development of a Theory from Educational Psychology

Möller

2024

Educ Psychol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dimensional comparison theory (DCT; Möller & Marsh 2013:Psychological Review, 120(3), 544–560), first formulated 10 years ago, describes individuals’ internal comparison processes applied between different areas of their lives. Dimensional comparisons explain the seemingly counterintuitive phenomenon that students’ verbal and mathematical self-concepts are almost uncorrelated, even though mathematical and verbal performances correlate highly positively: When students compare their performance in verbal and mathematical domains, dimensional comparisons lead to a contrast effect: students overestimate their ability in the intra-individually better domain and underestimate their ability in their intra-individually weaker domain, leading to near-zero correlations between the respective self-concepts.This paper describes diverse extensions of the classic DCT into a variety of predictors (especially various school subjects, beyond math and native language) and criteria (especially task value components, in addition to subject-specific self-concepts) and extensions of the applicability of the DCT as an educational psychological theory to contexts such as clinical and health psychology. Recent findings on the psychological processes that trigger, accompany, and follow dimensional comparisons are summarized, before an overview of different methods to capture dimensional comparisons is given, and further research directions are discussed.

show abstract

Perspective matters: The internal/external frame of reference model for self- and peer ratings of achievement

Cited by 7 publications

References 54 publications

Individual differences in local and global metacognitive judgments

Individual differences in local and global metacognitive judgments

Social, dimensional, and temporal comparisons by students and parents: An investigation of the 2I/E model at the transition from elementary to junior high school.

Ten Years of Dimensional Comparison Theory: On the Development of a Theory from Educational Psychology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About