Adult metacomprehension: Judgment processes and accuracy constraints

Educational Psychology Review

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 191-206

  Zhao, Qin ^a   Linderholm, Tracy ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

Anchoring and adjustment; Metacomprehension accuracy; Metacomprehension judgment; Reading comprehension

Indexed keywords

EID: 42149158215     PISSN: 1040726X     EISSN: 1573336X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10648-008-9073-8     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Connor, L. T., Dunlosky, J., & Hertzog, C. (1997). Age-related differences in absolute but not relative metamemory accuracy. Psychology and Aging, 12, 50-71.
2. de Carvalho Filho, M. K., & Yuzawa, M. (2001). The effect of social influences and general metacognitive knowledge on metamemory judgments. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 571-587.
3. Dunlosky, J., Baker, J. M. C., Rawson, K. A., & Hertzog, C. (2006). Does aging influence people's metacomprehension? Effects of processing ease on judgments of text learning. Psychology and Aging, 21, 390-400.
4. 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.
5. Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., & Kruger, J. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12, 83-97.
6. Dunning, D., Meyerowitz, J. A., & Holzberg, A. D. (1989). Ambiguity and self-evaluation: The role of idiosyncratic trait definition in self-serving assessments of ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1082-1090.
7. Ehrlinger, J., & Dunning, D. (2003). How chronic self-views influence (and potentially mislead) estimates of performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 5-17.
8. Epley, N., & Gilovich, T. (2001). Putting adjustment back in the anchoring and adjustment heuristic: Differential processing of self-generated and experimenter-provided anchors. Psychological Science, 12, 391-396.
9. Epley, N., Keysar, B., Van Boven, L., & Gilovich, T. (2004). Perspective taking as egocentric anchoring and adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 327-339.
10. Falchikov, N., & Boud, D. (1989). Student self-assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 59, 395-430.
11. Flavell, J. H. (1985). Cognitive development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
12. Glenberg, A. M., & Epstein, W. (1985). Calibration of comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 702-718.
13. Glenberg, A. M., & Epstein, W. (1987). Inexpert calibration of comprehension. Memory and Cognition, 15, 84-93.
14. Glenberg, A. M., Sanocki, T., Epstein, W., & Morris, C. (1987). Enhancing calibration of comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116, 119-136.
15. Glover, J. A. (1989). Reading ability and the calibrator of comprehension. Educational Research Quarterly, 13, 7-11.
16. Hacker, D. J. (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). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
17. Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., Horgan, D. D., & Rakow, E. A. (2000). Test prediction and performance in a classroom context. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 160-170.
18. Hertzog, C., Saylar, L. L., Fleece, A. M., & Dixon, R. A. (1994). Metamemory and aging: Relations between predicted, actual, and perceived memory task performance. Aging & Cognition, 1, 203-237.
19. Kintsch, W. (1988). The use of knowledge in discourse processing: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163-182.
20. Kintsch, W. (1994). Learning from text. American Psychologist, 49, 294-303.
21. Koriat, A. (1995). Dissociating knowing and the feeling of knowing: Further evidence for the accessibility model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 311-333.
22. Koriat, A. (1997). Monitoring one's own knowledge during study: A cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 349-370.
23. Koriat, A., & Levy-Sadot, R. (1999). Processes underlying metacognitive judgments: Information-based and experience-based monitoring of one's own knowledge. In S. Chaiken, & Y. Trope (Eds.) Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 483-502). New York, NY: Guiford.
24. Lin, L., & Zabrucky, K. (1998). Calibration of comprehension: Research and implications for education and instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 345-391.
25. Linderholm, T., Cong, X., & Zhao, Q. (2008). Differences in low and high working-memory capacity readers' cognitive and metacognitive processing patterns as a function of reading for different purposes. Reading Psychology, in press.
26. Linderholm, T., & Zhao, Q. (2008). The impact of strategy instruction and timing of estimates on low and high working-memory capacity readers' absolute monitoring accuracy. Learning and Individual Differences, in press.
27. Maki, R. H. (1998). Test prediction over text materials. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.) Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 117-144). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
28. Maki, R. H., & Berry, S. L. (1984). Metacomprehension of text material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 663-679.
29. Maki, R. H., & Serra, M. (1992). The basis of text predictions for text material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 18, 116-126.
30. Maki, R. H., Shields, M., Wheeler, A. E., & Zacchilli, T. L. (2005). Individual differences in absolute and relative metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 723-731.
31. Millis, K. K., Simon, S., & tenBroek, N. S. (1998). Resource allocation during the rereading of scientific texts. Memory & Cognition, 26, 232-246.
32. Moore, D., Lin, L., & Zabrucky, K. (2005). A source of metacomprehension inaccuracy. Reading Psychology, 26, 251-265.
33. Morris, C. C. (1990). Retrieval processes underlying confidence in comprehension judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 16, 223-232.
34. Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and some new findings. In G. H. Bower (Ed.) The psychology of learning and motivation vol. 26 (pp. 125-173). New York: Academic.
35. Pierce, B. H., & Smith, S. M. (2001). The postdiction superiority effect in metacomprehension of text. Memory & Cognition, 29, 62-67.
36. Rawson, K. A., & Dunlosky, J. (2002). Are performance predictions for text based on ease of processing? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 28, 69-80.
37. Rawson, K. A., Dunlosky, J., & Thiede, K. W. (2000). The rereading effect: Metacomprehenion accuracy improves across reading trials. Memory & Cognition, 28, 1004-1010.
38. Scheck, P., Meeter, M., & Nelson, T. O. (2004). Anchoring effects in the absolute accuracy of immediate versus delayed judgments of learning. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 71-79.
39. Schraw, G., & Roedel, T. D. (1994). Test difficulty and judgment bias. Memory & Cognition, 22, 63-69.
40. Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M. C. M., & Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 66-73.
41. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124-1130.
42. Wiley, J., Griffin, T. D., & Thiede, K. W. (2005). Putting the comprehension in metacomprehension. The Journal of General Psychology, 132, 408-428.
43. Zhao, Q., Linderholm, T., & Therriault, D. (2006). Absolute metacomprehension accuracy: The effects of cue-utilization instruction and working-memory capacity. Poster presented at the 2006 American Psychological Association Convention, August, New Orleans, Louisiana.