Predicting others’ knowledge: Knowledge estimation as cue utilization

Abstract

Predicting what others know is vital to countless social and educational interactions. For example, the ability of teachers to accurately estimate what knowledge students have has been identified as a crucial component of effective teaching. I propose the knowledge estimation as cue-utilization framework, in which judges use a variety of available and salient metacognitive cues to estimate what others know. In three experiments, I tested three hypotheses of this framework: namely, that participants do not automatically ground estimates of others' knowledge in their own knowledge, that judgment conditions shift how participants weight different cues, and that participants differentially weight cues based upon their diagnosticity. Predictions of others' knowledge were dynamically generated by judges who weighed a variety of available and salient cues. Just as the accuracy of metacognitive monitoring of one's own learning depends upon the conditions under which judgments of self are elicited, the bases and accuracy of metacognitive judgments for others depends upon the conditions under which they are elicited.

Are children’s judgments of another’s accuracy linked to their metacognitive confidence judgments?

“…We might therefore not expect a correlation between self and other judgments if children weighed cues differently for the two judgment types, even with a single common Bayesian mechanism. Put differently: our results are consistent with self and other judgements relying on the same general process, but on distinct information (see also Thomas & Jacoby, 2013;Tullis, 2018).…”

Why does peer instruction benefit student learning?

“…Conversely, students receiving explanations can fill in gaps in their own understanding, correct misconceptions, and construct new, lasting knowledge. Fellow students may be particularly effective explainers because they can better take the perspective of their peer than the teacher (Priniski & Horne, 2019;Ryskin, Benjamin, Tullis, & Brown-Schmidt, 2015;Tullis, 2018). Peers may be better able than expert teachers to explain concepts in familiar terms and direct peers' attention to the relevant features of questions that they do not understand (Brown & Palincsar, 1989;Noddings, 1985;Vedder, 1985;Vygotsky, 1981).…”

Knowing what others know: Younger and older adults’ perspective-taking and memory for medication information.

“…More recently, Tullis (2018) posited that when estimating others’ knowledge, we use more than just an egocentric anchor: we also assess the stimuli, the conditions of the judgment, and the person whom we judge. We have less information about others’ memory abilities than we do about our own, and if we do not have much information about the person being judged, we may fail to accurately take their perspective (Tullis & Fraundorf, 2017).…”

“…When the “other” being judged has medical training, we expect participants to adjust their estimates in light of medical students’ interest and/or experience in the medical field, such that expectations are higher for medical students than for oneself. After the task, we expect participants’ judgments about themselves and others to be adjusted closer to actual performance as they learn more about the task, the stimuli, and their own memory abilities (Thomas & Jacoby, 2012; Tullis, 2018).…”