To Know or Not to Know, Is That the Question? Exploring the Role and Assessment of Metacognition in Cross-Cultural Contexts

Abstract

Findings from research in educational and cognitive psychology have shown that metacognition, defined as the awareness, monitoring, and evaluation of one's knowledge and cognitive processes, exerts substantial influence on individual performance. The majority of this research, however, has only examined metacognitive skill as it applies to academic settings, and has largely overlooked its applications to other contexts, such as cross-cultural performance. To better understand the role of metacognition in cross-cultural contexts, as well as the means by which it should be assessed, two studies were conducted that jointly explored the construct validity of a well-established self-reported measure of metacognition (i.e., the Metacognitive subscale of the Cultural Intelligence Scale; CQS), as well as its relative utility in predicting cross-cultural performance. Results from Study 1 indicated that self-reported metacognition (as measured by the CQS) is distinct from personality, but highly correlated with the other subfacets of self-reported cultural intelligence. Analyses using structural equation modeling (SEM) further revealed that peers (n = 206) were more accurate in rating participants' cultural intelligence than were participants themselves (n = 206). Results from Study 2, which explored the criterionrelated validity of the Metacognitive subscale of the CQS, in particular, demonstrated that self-reported metacognition did not predict international students' adaptation (n = 50). These findings are discussed in light of other research that has called into question the validity of selfreported measures of metacognition, in general.

From tolerance to understanding: Exploring the development of intercultural competence in multiethnic contexts from early to late adolescence

“…This is likely a result of the measurement method. Although self‐reports may be a valid strategy to capture attitudes, they are less suited to capture cognitive, metacognitive, and behavioural skills (Klafehn et al, ). Especially younger children and adolescents may have difficulties with self‐reporting these capabilities because they tend to have a superficial understanding of culture (Quintana et al, ) and may underestimate the challenges that can go along with intercultural interactions.…”

“…Finally, culturally intelligent individuals use appropriate verbal and nonverbal behaviour in diverse cultural situations (behavioural CQ). Even though CQ is often measured using self‐report questionnaires, these have been criticized because people may be unable to accurately report their own CQ abilities (Klafehn, Li, & Chiu, ). Situational judgment tests (SJTs; Rockstuhl, Ang, Ng, Lievens, & Van Dyne, ), comprising intercultural critical incidents, followed by questions assessing the participants' response to or interpretation of the incidents, were proposed as alternative measures.…”

Reaping the benefits of cultural diversity: Classroom cultural diversity climate and students’ intercultural competence

“…Intercultural competence is often assessed using self-report measures, such as the cultural intelligence scale (CQS) (Van Dyne et al, 2012). However, these measures are not tailored to adolescents and have been criticized because people might not be able to accurately report their own competences (Klafehn, Li, & Chiu, 2013).…”

“…Intercultural competence is often assessed using self‐report measures, such as the cultural intelligence scale (CQS) (Van Dyne et al., ). However, these measures are not tailored to adolescents and have been criticized because people might not be able to accurately report their own competences (Klafehn, Li, & Chiu, ). In the face of calls for a multimodal assessment of intercultural competence (Deardorff, ), situational judgment tests (SJTs) have been used as an alternative assessment method.…”

Hype or hope? A new look at the research on cultural intelligence

“…Previous research has assumed that metacognitive CQ includes an individual's self-concept and inductive reasoning (Earley, 2002) as well as the ability to question one's own expectations. However, Klafehn, Li, and Chiu's (2013) empirical results questioned "the uniqueness of the metacognitive CQ subscale as a stand-alone subfacet" (p. 974), which will be discussed in more detail in the validity section (Section 4.2).…”