The Relation Between Students’ Effort and Monitoring Judgments During Learning: A Meta-analysis

被引:0
作者
Martine Baars
Lisette Wijnia
Anique de Bruin
Fred Paas
机构
[1] Erasmus University Rotterdam,Department of Psychology, Education and Child Studies
[2] HZ University of Applied Sciences,Erasmus University College
[3] Erasmus University Rotterdam,Department of Educational Development and Research
[4] Maastricht University,School of Education/ Early Start
[5] University of Wollongong,undefined
来源
Educational Psychology Review | 2020年 / 32卷
关键词
Effort; Monitoring; Cue utilization; Meta-analysis; Metacognitive judgments;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Research has shown a bi-directional association between the (perceived) amount of invested effort to learn or retrieve information (e.g., time, mental effort) and metacognitive monitoring judgments. The direction of this association likely depends on how learners allocate their effort. In self-paced learning, effort allocation is usually data driven, where the ease of memorizing is used as a cue, resulting in a negative correlation between effort and monitoring judgments. Effort allocation is goal driven when it is strategically invested (e.g., based on the importance of items or time pressure) and likely results in a positive correlation. The current study used a meta-analytic approach to synthesize the results from several studies on the relationship between effort and monitoring judgments. The results showed that there was a negative association between effort and monitoring judgments (r = − .355). Furthermore, an exploration of possible moderators of this association between effort and monitoring was made. The negative association was no longer significant when goal-driven regulation was manipulated. Furthermore, it was found that the type of monitoring judgment (i.e., a weaker association for prospective judgments) and type of task (stronger association for problem-solving tasks relative to paired associates) moderated the relation between effort and monitoring. These results have important implications for future research on the use of effort as a cue for monitoring in self-regulated learning.
引用
收藏
页码:979 / 1002
页数:23
相关论文
共 37 条
[1]  
Ackerman R(2017)Meta-reasoning: Monitoring and control of thinking and reasoning Trends in Cognitive Sciences 21 607-617
[2]  
Thompson VA(2012)Overconfidence produces underachievement: inaccurate self-evaluations undermine students’ learning and retention Learning and Instruction 22 271-280
[3]  
Dunlosky J(2000)A nonparametric “trim and fill” method of accounting for publication bias in meta-analysis Journal of the American Statistical Association 95 89-98
[4]  
Rawson KA(1997)Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test British Medical Journal 315 629-634
[5]  
Duval SJ(2002)Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis Statistics in Medicine 21 1539-1558
[6]  
Tweedie RL(1997)Monitoring one’s own knowledge during study: a cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 126 349-370
[7]  
Egger M(2009)Attributing study effort to data-driven and goal-driven effects: implications for metacognitive judgments Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 35 1338-1343
[8]  
Smith GD(1998)Predicting performance on text: delayed versus immediate predictions and tests Memory & Cognition 26 959-964
[9]  
Schneider M(2005)A region of proximal learning model of study time allocation Journal of Memory and Language 52 463-477
[10]  
Minder C(1992)Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: a cognitive-load approach Journal of Educational Psychology 84 429-434