An Investigation of Accuracy of Metacognitive Judgments during Learning with an Intelligent Multi-Agent Hypermedia Environment

Expanding the Space of Cognitive Science - Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, CogSci 2011

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 96-101

  Feyzi Behnagh, Reza ^a   Khezri, Zohreh ^a   Azevedo, Roger ^a  

^a MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Accuracy; FOK; Hypermedia; JOL; Metacognitive Judgments; Multi Agent Learning Environment

Indexed keywords

CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEM; COMPUTER AIDED INSTRUCTION; HYPERMEDIA SYSTEMS; LEARNING SYSTEMS; MULTI AGENT SYSTEMS; STUDENTS;

ACCURACY; CONDITION; FEELING OF KNOWING; HYPERMEDIA; INTELLIGENT MULTI-AGENT; JUDGMENT OF LEARNING; LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS; METACOGNITIVE JUDGMENTS; MULTI-AGENT LEARNING; MULTI-AGENT LEARNING ENVIRONMENT;

FEEDBACK;

EID: 84880024114     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (25)

1. Azevedo, R., Cromley, J. G., Moos, D. C., Greene, J. A., & Winters, F. I. (in press). Adaptive content and process scaffolding: the key to facilitating students’ self-regulated learning with hypermedia. Psychology Science Quarterly.
2. Azevedo R., Johnson A., Chauncey A., & Graesser A. (2011). Use of hypermedia to convey and assess self-regulated learning. In B. Zimmerman and D. Schunk (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 102-121). New York: Routledge
3. Azevedo, R., Moos, D., Johnson, A. M., & Chauncey, A. D. (2010). Measuring cognitive and metacognitive regulatory processes during hypermedia learning: issues and challenges. Educational Psychologist, 45(4), 1-14.
4. Azevedo, R. & Witherspoon, A. M. (2009). Self-regulated learning with hypermedia. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, and A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 319-339). Mahwah, NJ: Routledge.
5. Biswas, G., Jeong, H., Kinnebrew, J., Sulcer, B., & Roscoe, R. (2010). Measuring self-regulated learning skills through social interactions in a teachable agent environment. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 5(2), 123-152.
6. Boekaerts, M. & Rozendaal, J. S. (2010). Using multiple calibration indices in order to capture the complex picture of what affects students’ accuracy of feeling of confidence. Leaning and Instruction, 20, 372-382.
7. Dunlosky, J. & Lipko, A. R. (2007). Metacomprehension: A brief history and how to improve its accuracy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16 (4), 228-232.
8. Dunlosky, J. & Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
9. Faw, H. W., & Waller, T. G. (1976). Mathemagenic behaviors and efficiency in learning from prose materials: Review, critique, and recommendations. Review of Educational Research, 46(4), 691-720.
10. Graesser, A. & McNamara, D. (2010). Self-regulated learning in learning environments with pedagogical agents that interact in natural language. Educational Psychologist, 45(2), 234-244.
11. Kelemen, W. L., Frost, P. J., & Weaver, C. A. (2000). Individual differences in metacognition: Evidnce against a general metacognitive ability. Memory & Cognition, 28 (1), 92-107.
12. Leelawong, K. & Biswas, G. (2008). Designing learning by teaching agents: The Betty’s Brain system. International Journal of AI in Education, 18, 181-208.
13. Lichtenstein, S. & Fischhoff, B. (1977). Do those who know more also know more about how much they know? Organizational Behvaior and Human Performance, 20, 159-183.
14. McQuiggan, S. W. & Lester, J. C., (2007). Modeling and evaluating empathy in embodied companion agents. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 65, 348-360.
15. Nelson, T. O. (1991). When people’s judgments of learning (JOLs) are extremely accurate at predicting subsequent recall: The “delayed-JOL effect”. Psychological Science, 2 (4), 267-270.
16. Nelson, T. O. (1996). Consciousness and metacognition. American psychologist, 51, 250-256.
17. Schwartz, D. L., Chase, C., Chin, D. B., Oppezzo, M., Kwong, H., Okita, S., Biswas, G., Roscoe, R., Hogyeong, J., & Wagster, J. (2009). Interactive metacognition: monitoring and regulating a teachable agent. In D. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 340-358). New York: Routledge.
18. Schraw, G. (2009). A conceptual analysis of five measures of metacognitive monitoring. Metacognition and Learning, 4, 33-45.
19. Sharp, G. L., Cutler, B. L., & Penrod, S. D. (1988). Performance feedback improves the resolution of confidence judgments. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 42, 271-283.
20. Simons, P. R. J. (1983). How we should control time on task – Or should we? Instructional Science, 11, 357-372.
21. Stone, N. J. (2000). Exploring the relationship between calibration and self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 12 (4), 437-475.
22. Thiede, K. W., Dunlosky, J., Griffin, D., & Wiley, J. (2005). Understanding the delayed-keyword effect on metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 1267-1280.
23. Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-Walters, B. H. A., & Afferbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1, 3-14.
24. White, B., Frederiksen, J., & Collins, A. (2009). The interplay of scientific inquiry and metacognition: More than a marriage of convenience. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, and A. C. Graesser (Eds.) Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 175-205). New York: Routledge.
25. Winne, P. H. (2010). Improving measurements of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 45, 267-276.