Metacognition and Learning最新文献

Abstract

According to an aptitude-treatment interaction experiment (Lehmann et al., Metacognition and Learning, 11, 89–105, 2016, N = 47, published in Metacognition and Learning), perceptually disfluent texts facilitated retention and comprehension performance (but not transfer performance) only for learners with higher working memory capacity (WMC). No effects of WMC for a fluent text were found (albeit theoretically, fluency may be more advantageous for learners with lower WMC). The findings of our (pre-registered) direct replication (supervised online sample of N = 96) show a substantial deviation from the original results: In contrast to the interaction effect (disfluency and WMC) of the primary study, we obtained null results for disfluency, WMC, and their interaction for all learning outcomes. Our replication data are not indicative of WMC as a boundary condition moderating the disfluency effect on learning. We discuss discrepancies in the results of the primary study and our direct replication regarding particular methodological and analytical decisions, questioning the robustness and generalizability of Lehman et al.’s results beyond their primary study.

Learning from texts means acquiring and applying knowledge, which requires students to judge their text comprehension accurately. However, students usually overestimate their comprehension, which can be caused by a misalignment between the cues used to judge one’s comprehension and the cognitive requirements of future test questions. Therefore, reading instructions might help students to use more valid cues and hence to make more accurate judgments. In two randomized experiments, we investigated the effect of application instructions (in contrast to general and memory instructions) on judgment bias regarding memory test performance and application test performance. In Experiment 1, 131 pre-service teacher students read two texts: For the first text (pretest phase), all participants received general reading instructions. For the second text (testing phase), they received one of the three reading instructions. Main results were that the general reading instructions in the pretest phase resulted in underestimation for memory test performance and overestimation for application test performance. Results from the testing phase yielded mixed effects and, overall, no strong evidence that reading instructions, and in particular application instructions, are beneficial for debiasing judgments of comprehension. Experiment 2 (N = 164 pre-service teachers) restudied the effects with the same texts but a different study design. Results replicated the effects found in the testing phase of Experiment 1. Overall, the results indicated that reading instructions without further support are not sufficient to help students to accurately judge their comprehension and suggested that text characteristics might impact the effect of reading instructions on judgment bias.

Prior research suggests most students do not glean valid cues from provided visuals, resulting in reduced metacomprehension accuracy. Across 4 experiments, we explored how the presence of instructional visuals affects students’ metacomprehension accuracy and cue-use for different types of metacognitive judgments. Undergraduates read texts on biology (Study 1a and b) or chemistry (Study 2 and 3) topics, made various judgments (test, explain, and draw) for each text, and completed comprehension tests. Students were randomly assigned to receive only texts (text-only condition) or texts with instructional visualizations (text-and-image condition). In Studies 1b, 2 and 3, students also reported the cues they used to make each judgment. Across the set of studies, instructional visualizations harmed relative metacomprehension accuracy. In Studies 1a and 2, this was especially the case when students were asked to judge how well they felt they could draw the processes described in the text. But in Study 3, this was especially the case when students were asked to judge how well they would do on a set of comprehension tests. In Studies 2 and 3, students who reported basing their judgments on representation-based cues demonstrated more accurate relative accuracy than students who reported using heuristic based cues. Further, across these studies, students reported using visual cues to make their draw judgments, but not their test or explain judgments. Taken together, these results indicate that instructional visualizations can hinder metacognitive judgment accuracy, particularly by influencing the types of cues students use to make judgments of their ability to draw key concepts.

Judgments of learning (JOLs) are often reactive on memory for cue-target pairs. This pattern, however, is moderated by relatedness, as related but not unrelated pairs often show a memorial benefit compared to a no-JOL control group. Based on Soderstrom et al.’s, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 41, 553-558, (2015) cue-strengthening account, JOLs direct attention towards intrinsic cues which aid retrieval. However, reactivity may also reflect specific processing of cue-target associations, which is applied whenever semantic associations are available, even when these associations are indirect. The present study tested this possibility using mediated associates (e.g., lion – stripes) which are directly unrelated to each other and indirectly related through a non-presented mediator (e.g., tiger). Based on a cue-strengthening account, no reactivity would be expected for mediated associates. Alternatively, if cue strengthening primarily reflects enhanced processing of cue-target relations, memory benefits would be expected whenever pairs are semantically related, even if pairs are indirectly related through mediators. Overall, reactivity extended to mediated associates in cued-recall (Experiment 1) and recognition tests (Experiments 2 and 3). Interestingly, JOL reactivity was consistently found on recognition of non-mediated unrelated pairs (Experiments 2–4). Thus, positive reactivity on related pairs for cued-recall testing likely reflects increased activation of cue-target associations. However, because recognition is based on familiarity cues, reactivity occurs globally for all pair types, regardless of cue-target relations.

Self-regulated learning (SRL) is crucial to students’ learning. SRL is characterized by students taking initiative, showing perseverance and adaptively regulating their learning. Teachers play an essential role in promoting and fostering this process. However, several studies have shown that in primary education explicit instruction of SRL strategies barely takes place. Given the relevance of SRL for learning and preparing students for the knowledge society of the 21st century, it is of crucial importance that teachers in primary education learn how they can improve their students’ SRL. In the present study, we implemented a professional development program (iSELF) in which primary teachers were trained and coached in promoting and fostering their students’ SRL. The extent to which iSELF contributed to teachers’ explicit instruction of SRL strategies was evaluated in a quasi-experimental pre-test-post-test design using video-based classroom observations. Thirty teachers from fourteen different primary schools participated in this study and were assigned to either a control (twelve teachers) or an experimental group (eighteen teachers). Results indicate that in both conditions explicit SRL strategy instruction is rare. However, explicit instruction of SRL strategies is significantly higher in the experimental group on the post-test compared to the control group showing that teachers do benefit from learning about explicit SRL instruction.

Abstract

Metamemory judgments, defined as predictions of memory performance, are often influenced by misleading cues, such as fluency. However, how fluency cues compete to influence retrospective metamemory judgments is still unclear. The present study investigated how multiple fluency cues concurrently influence immediate feeling of knowing (FOK) judgments with two fluency manipulations—font size (large vs. small font size) as a perceptual cue and level of processing (deep vs. shallow processing) as a conceptual cue. In Experiment 1, participants studied large or small unrelated word pairs and were either directed to process the conceptual aspects of each word pair (deep) or to focus on the perceptual aspects of the word pairs (shallow). Then participants were presented with a cued recall test and asked to make an FOK judgment. Lastly, participants received a five alternative- forced-choice recognition test. Experiment 2 was similar except the deep condition was replaced with a no-processing (no instruction) condition. Results revealed that perceptual fluency (large font size) influenced FOK judgments only when word pairs were processed in the shallow condition in both experiments compared to no-processing condition. This interaction of multiple cues suggests that, participants rely on information which is easily accessible to them (perceptual fluency) for FOK judgements in presence of certain secondary cues despite those cues being less diagnostic of future memory performance. These new insights inform how people integrate different sources of information in metamemory decisions and have broad implications for settings including academic learning and everyday decision making.

To become proficient problem solvers, science and engineering students have to acquire the skill of self-regulating their problem-solving processes, a skill supported by their metacognitive abilities. The Disciplinary Learning Companion (DLC) is an online tool designed to scaffold students’ use of metacognitive activities through discipline-specific and even topic-specific reflective prompts. Our research focuses on the effectiveness of these reflective prompts in fostering metacognitive abilities. A prior study demonstrated a positive relationship between students’ interaction with the DLC and their academic achievement. The current study investigates whether an increase in metacognitive abilities can partially explain this relationship. To this end, we study the relationship between students’ interaction with the DLC and their strategic approach to solving an exam problem, using the latter as an indicator for metacognitive abilities. Additionally, since students’ prior metacognitive abilities may influence this relationship, we investigate how the results are affected by students’ prior abilities. Our findings indicate that, compared to students who had minimal or no interaction with the DLC, those who engaged more frequently with the DLC exhibited a more strategic approach to solving an exam problem. Notably, this effect was particularly pronounced among students who interacted with the DLC’s reflection module that focused on the physics topic relevant to the specific exam question. These results persist when we control for students’ prior metacognitive abilities. In conclusion, students’ improvement in academic achievement can be attributed to a combination of enhanced conceptual understanding of the particular physics topic and an improved strategic approach to problem solving.

To become proficient problem solvers, science and engineering students have to acquire the skill of self-regulating their problem-solving processes, a skill supported by their metacognitive abilities. The Disciplinary Learning Companion (DLC) is an online tool designed to scaffold students’ use of metacognitive activities through discipline-specific and even topic-specific reflective prompts. Our research focuses on the effectiveness of these reflective prompts in fostering metacognitive abilities. A prior study demonstrated a positive relationship between students’ interaction with the DLC and their academic achievement. The current study investigates whether an increase in metacognitive abilities can partially explain this relationship. To this end, we study the relationship between students’ interaction with the DLC and their strategic approach to solving an exam problem, using the latter as an indicator for metacognitive abilities. Additionally, since students’ prior metacognitive abilities may influence this relationship, we investigate how the results are affected by students’ prior abilities. Our findings indicate that, compared to students who had minimal or no interaction with the DLC, those who engaged more frequently with the DLC exhibited a more strategic approach to solving an exam problem. Notably, this effect was particularly pronounced among students who interacted with the DLC’s reflection module that focused on the physics topic relevant to the specific exam question. These results persist when we control for students’ prior metacognitive abilities. In conclusion, students’ improvement in academic achievement can be attributed to a combination of enhanced conceptual understanding of the particular physics topic and an improved strategic approach to problem solving.