Improving students' self-evaluation of learning for key concepts in textbook materials

European Journal of Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 19, Issue 4-5, 2007, Pages 559-579

  Rawson, Katherine A ^a   Dunlosky, John ^a  

^a KENT STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; COLLEGE STUDENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY; EDUCATIONAL THEORY; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LEARNING; NORMAL HUMAN; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SELF CONCEPT; SELF EVALUATION; STUDENT;

EID: 34347384574     PISSN: 09541446     EISSN: 14640635     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09541440701326022     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Baker, J., & Dunlosky, J. (2006). Does momentary accessibility influence metacomprehension judgments? The influence of study-judgment lags on accessibility effects. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 13, 60-65.
2. Benjamin, A. S., Bjork, R. A., & Schwartz, B. L. (1998). The mismeasure of memory: When retrieval fluency is misleading as a metamnemonic index. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 55-68.
3. Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2007). Testing improves long-term retention in a simulated classroom setting. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 514-527.
4. Cull, W. L. (2000). Untangling the benefits of multiple study opportunities and repeated testing for cued recall. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14, 215-235.
5. Dunlosky, J., & Rawson, K. A. (2005). Why does rereading improve metacomprehension accuracy? Evaluating the levels-of-disruption hypothesis for the rereading effect. Discourse Processes, 40, 37-55.
6. Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., & McDonald, S. L. (2002). Influence of practice tests on the accuracy of predicting memory performance for paired associates, sentences, and text material. In T. Perfect & B. Schwartz (Eds.), Applied metacognition (pp. 68-92). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
7. Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., & Middleton, E. L. (2005). What constrains the accuracy of metacomprehension judgments? Testing the transfer-appropriate-monitoring and accessibility hypotheses. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 551-565.
8. Hacker, D. (1998). Self-regulated comprehension during normal reading. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 165-191). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
9. Howe, M. J. A. (1970). Repeated presentation and recall of meaningful prose. Journal of Educational Psychology, 61, 214-219.
10. Johnson, H. M., & Seifert, C. M. (1994). Sources of the continued influence effect: When misinformation in memory affects later inferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 1420-1436.
11. Kang, S. H. K., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2007). Test format and corrective feedback modify the effect of testing on long-term retention. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 528-558.
12. Kelemen, W. L. (2000). Metamemory cues and monitoring accuracy: Judging what you know and what you will know. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 800-810.
13. Kimball, D. R., & Metcalfe, J. (2003). Delaying judgments of learning affects memory, not metamemory. Memory and Cognition, 31, 918-929.
14. Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163-182.
15. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
16. Koriat, A. (1993). How do we know that we know? The accessibility model of the feeling of knowing. Psychological Review, 100, 609-639.
17. Maki, R. H. (1998). Test predictions over text material. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 117-145). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
18. Miesner, M. T., & Maki, R. H. (2007). The role of test anxiety in absolute and relative metacomprehension accuracy. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 650-670.
19. Morris, C. C. (1990). Retrieval processes underlying confidence in comprehension judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 223-232.
20. Nelson, T. O., Narens, L., & Dunlosky, J. (2004). A revised method for research on metamemory: Pre-judgment recall and monitoring (PRAM). Psychological Method, 9, 53-69.
21. Otero, J., & Kintsch, W. (1992). Failures to detect contradictions in a text: What readers believe versus what they read. Psychological Science, 3, 229-235.
22. Pashler, H., Cepeda, N. J., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2005). When does feedback facilitate learning of words? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 3-8.
23. Reder, L. M., & Ritter, F. E. (1992). What determines initial feeling of knowing? Familiarity with question terms, not with the answer. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 435-451.
24. Son, L. K., & Metcalfe, J. (2005). Judgments of learning: Evidence for a two-stage process. Memory and Cognition, 33, 1116-1129.
25. Thiede, K. W. (1999). The importance of monitoring and self-regulation during multi-trial learning. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 6, 662-667.
26. Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M. C. M., & Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 66-73.
27. Titsworth, B. S., & Kiewra, K. A. (2004). Spoken organizational lecture cues and student notetaking as facilitators of student learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 447-461.
28. Weaver, C. A., Bryant, D. S., & Burns, K. D. (1995). Comprehension monitoring: Extensions of the Kinstch and van Dijk model. In C. A. Weaver, S. Mannes, & C. R. Fletcher (Eds.), Discourse comprehension: Essays in honor of Walter Kintsch (pp. 177-193). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.