Test expectancy affects metacomprehension accuracy

British Journal of Educational Psychology

Volumn 81, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 264-273

  Thiede, Keith W ^a   Wiley, Jennifer ^b   Griffin, Thomas D ^b  

^a BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACHIEVEMENT; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANTICIPATION; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; COMPREHENSION; DECISION MAKING; EDUCATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MOTIVATION; RECALL;

ACHIEVEMENT; ADOLESCENT; ANTICIPATION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; ATTENTION; COMPREHENSION; CUES; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MALE; MENTAL RECALL; MOTIVATION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79955591906     PISSN: 00070998     EISSN: 20448279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1348/135910710X510494     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Begg, I., Duft, S., Lalonde, P., Melinick, R., & Sanvito, J. (1989). Memory predictions are based on ease of processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 610-632. doi.
2. Brown, A. L., & Smiley, S. S. (1977). Rating the importance of structural units of prose passages: A problem of metacognitive development. Child Development, 48, 1-8. doi.
3. Dunlosky, J., & Lipko, A. R. (2007). Metacomprehension: A brief history and how to improve its accuracy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 228-232. doi.
4. Dunlosky, J., & Nelson, T. O. (1997). Similarity between the cue for judgments of learning (JOL) and the cue for test is not the primary determinant of JOL accuracy. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 34-49. doi.
5. Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., & Middleton, E. (2005). What constrains the accuracy of metacomprehension judgments? Testing the transfer-appropriate-monitoring and accessibility hypotheses. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 551-565. doi.
6. Glenberg, A. M., Sanocki, T., Epstein, W., & Morris, C. (1987). Enhancing calibration of comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116, 119-136. doi.
7. Goodman, L. A., & Kruskal, W. H. (1954). Measures of association for cross classification. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 49, 732-764. doi.
8. Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., & Thiede, K. W. (2008). Individual differences, rereading, and self-explanation: Concurrent processing and cue validity as constraints on metacomprehension accuracy. Memory and Cognition, 36, 93-103. doi.
9. Kelemen, W. L., Winningham, R. G., & Weaver, C. A. (2007). Repeated testing sessions and scholastic aptitude in college students' metacognitive accuracy. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 689-717. doi.
10. 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. doi.
11. Lundeberg, M. A., & Fox, P. W. (1991). Do laboratory findings on text expectancy generalize to classroom outcomes? Review of Educational Research, 61, 94-106.
12. 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. 117-144). Hillsdale, NJ LEA.
13. Maki, R. H., & Serra, M. (1992). Role of practice tests in the accuracy of test predictions on text material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 200-210. doi.
14. McDaniel, M. A., Blischak, D. M., & Challis, B. (1994). The effects of test expectancy on processing and memory of prose. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 230-248. doi.
15. McDaniel, M. A., Hines, R. J., Waddill, P. J., & Einstein, G. O. (1994). What makes folk tales unique: Content familiarity, causal structure, scripts, or superstructure? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 169-184. doi.
16. Morris, C. D., Bransford, J. D., & Franks, J. J. (1977). Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 519-533. doi.
17. Nelson, T. O. (1984). A comparison of current measures of feeling-of-knowing accuracy. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 109-133. doi.
18. Thiede, K. W. (1996). The relative importance of anticipated test format and anticipated test difficulty on performance. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 49, 901-918. doi.
19. Thiede, K. W., & Anderson, M. C. M. (2003). Summarizing can improve metacomprehension accuracy. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 129-160. doi.
20. 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. doi.
21. Thiede, K. W., Dunlosky, J., Griffin, T. D., & Wiley, J. (2005). Understanding the delayed keyword effect on metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Experiment Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 31, 1267-1280. doi.
22. Thiede, K. W., Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., & Anderson, M. C. M. (2010). Poor metacomprehension accuracy as a result of inappropriate cue use. Discourse Processes, 47, 331-362. doi.
23. Thiede, K. W., Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., & Redford, J. S. (2009). Metacognitive monitoring during and after reading. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition and self-regulated learning (pp. 85-106). New York Routledge.
24. Thomas, A. K., & McDaniel, M. A. (2007). The negative cascade of incongruent generative study-test processing in memory and metacomprehension. Memory and Cognition, 35, 668-678.
25. Weaver, C. A., & Bryant, D. S. (1995). Monitoring of comprehension: The role of text difficulty in metamemory for narrative and expository text. Memory and Cognition, 23, 12-22.
26. Weaver, C. A., & Kelemen, W. L. (2003). Processing similarity does not improve metamemory: Evidence against transfer-appropriate-monitoring. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 1058-1065. doi.
27. Wiley, J., Griffin, T., & Thiede, K. W. (2005). Putting the comprehension in metacomprehension. Journal of General Psychology, 132, 408-428. doi.