Keith W. Thiede

Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts.

Metacognitive monitoring affects regulation of study, and this affects overall learning. The authors created differences in monitoring accuracy by instructing participants to generate a list of 5 keywords that captured the essence of each text. Accuracy was greater for a group that wrote keywords after a delay (delayed-keyword group) than for a group that wrote keywords immediately after reading (immediate-keyword group) and a group that did not write keywords (no-keyword group). The superior monitoring accuracy produced more effective regulation of study. Differences in monitoring accuracy and regulation of study, in turn, produced greater overall test performance (reading comprehension) for the delayed-keyword group versus the other groups. The results are framed in the context of a discrepancy-reduction model of self-regulated study. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Summarizing can improve metacomprehension accuracy

Abstract In two experiments, it was examined whether the accuracy of comprehension monitoring (metacomprehension accuracy) was improved by summarizing texts. College students read texts and then some wrote a summary of each text (either immediately after reading or after a delay—the delay between reading and summarizing was filled by the reading of the remaining texts), whereas others did not (the control group). All the students then rated their comprehension of each text. Finally, they completed a test of the material covered in each text. In both experiments, metacomprehension accuracy, operationalized as the correlation between ratings of comprehension and subsequent test performance, was dramatically greater for the group of students that wrote summaries after a delay than for the control group or the group of students that wrote summaries immediately after reading a text. These findings are described in the context of a discrepancy-reduction model of self-regulated study.

The rereading effect: Metacomprehension accuracy improves across reading trials

Guided by a hypothesis that integrates principles of monitoring from a cue-based framework of metacognitive judgments with assumptions about levels of text representation derived from theories of comprehension, we discovered that rereading improves metacomprehension accuracy. In Experiments 1 and 2, the participants read texts either once or twice, rated their comprehension for each text, and then were tested on the material. In both experiments, correlations between comprehension ratings and test scores were reliably greater for participants who reread texts than for participants who read texts only once. Furthermore, in contrast to the low levels of accuracy typically reported in the literature, rereading produced relatively high levels of accuracy, with the median gamma between ratings and test performance being +.60 across participants from both experiments. Our discussion focuses on two alternative hypotheses—that improved accuracy is an artifact of when judgments are collected or that it results from increased reliability of test performance—and on evidence that is inconsistent with these explanations for the rereading effect.

The importance of monitoring and self-regulation during multitrial learning

Theory suggests that accuracy of metacognitive monitoring and self-regulation of study will affect test performance, but there is little empirical evidence linking these variables. I examined the relation among these variables in a multitrial learning task. Regression analyses showed that monitoring accuracy and self-regulation were reliably related to test performance—greater monitoring accuracy and more effective self-regulation were associated with greater test performance. These analyses were contrasted with analyses typically conducted in previous research, to show the importance of using a multitrial learning task and of attending to the theoretically based causal relation among variables when evaluating how monitoring accuracy and self-regulation are related to test performance. The results of this investigation may help to explain why previous research has failed to link these variables.

What makes people study more? An evaluation of factors that affect self-paced study

Allocation of study time across items was investigated in three experiments. According to the norm-affects-allocation hypothesis, when studying an item, a person changes the sought-after degree of learning for the item (called the norm of study) in an attempt to achieve task goals. As the norm of study is increased, more time will be allocated for study. This hypothesis was evaluated by having people pace their study of items for an eventual test of recall. As predicted, study time was greater (a) when points awarded for recalling an item increased, (b) when instructions emphasized mastering each item rather than quickly learning each item, (c) when points deducted for each second of study decreased, and (d) when the likelihood an item would be on the test increased. Also, although allocating more study time was usually accompanied by an increase in eventual recall, under several conditions peoples allocation of study time appeared sub-optimal. Discussion focuses on current theory of self-paced study and peoples apparent sub-optimal allocation of study time.

Individual differences, rereading, and self-explanation: Concurrent processing and cue validity as constraints on metacomprehension accuracy.

The typical finding of metacomprehension studies is that accuracy in monitoring one’s own level of understanding is quite poor. In the present experiments, monitoring accuracy was constrained by individual differences in both reading comprehension ability and working memory capacity (WMC), but rereading particularly benefited low-ability and low-WMC readers, effectively eliminating the relationship between monitoring accuracy and these reader characteristics. In addition, introducing a self-explanation reading strategy improved the accuracy of all the readers above mere rereading. The observed interaction between individual differences and rereading is interpreted in terms of concurrent-processing constraints involved in monitoring while text is processed, whereas the more general self-explanation effect is interpreted in terms of accessibility of valid, performance-predicting cues.

Assessing After-School Programs as Contexts for Youth Development:

Educators, policy makers, and funders increasingly argue that structured afterschool activities can provide youth with valuable supports for development. Studies assessing the impact of particular programs and strategies, however, are rare. This study presents a method of assessment that enables evaluation of varied youth programs in accordance with a youth development agenda. The data include a sample of 6th-through 10th-grade African American students (N = 125) as well as samples of students who participated in three other after-school programs. The analysis of survey data indicates that only some after-school programs provide more opportunities and supports for youth development than students receive during the school day but that almost all provide significantly more attractive affective contexts than students experience during the school day. This difference is particularly great for African American male youth. The study also compares community- and school-based afterschool programs and identifies possible directions for future research.

Understanding the Delayed-Keyword Effect on Metacomprehension Accuracy.

The typical finding from research on metacomprehension is that accuracy is quite low. However, recent studies have shown robust accuracy improvements when judgments follow certain generation tasks (summarizing or keyword listing) but only when these tasks are performed at a delay rather than immediately after reading (K. W. Thiede & M. C. M. Anderson, 2003; K. W. Thiede, M. C. M. Anderson, & D. Therriault, 2003). The delayed and immediate conditions in these studies confounded the delay between reading and generation tasks with other task lags, including the lag between multiple generation tasks and the lag between generation tasks and judgments. The first 2 experiments disentangle these confounded manipulations and provide clear evidence that the delay between reading and keyword generation is the only lag critical to improving metacomprehension accuracy. The 3rd and 4th experiments show that not all delayed tasks produce improvements and suggest that delayed generative tasks provide necessary diagnostic cues about comprehension for improving metacomprehension accuracy.

Generating Keywords Improves Metacomprehension and Self-Regulation in Elementary and Middle School Children.

The ability to monitor understanding of texts, usually referred to as metacomprehension accuracy, is typically quite poor in adult learners; however, recently interventions have been developed to improve accuracy. In two experiments, we evaluated whether generating delayed keywords prior to judging comprehension improved metacomprehension accuracy for children. For sixth and seventh graders, metacomprehension accuracy was greater when generating keywords. By contrast, for fourth graders, metacomprehension accuracy did not differ across conditions. Improved metacomprehension accuracy led to improved regulation of study. The delayed keyword effect in children reported here is discussed in terms of situation model activation.

Poor Metacomprehension Accuracy as a Result of Inappropriate Cue Use.

Two studies attempt to determine the causes of poor metacomprehension accuracy and then, in turn, to identify interventions that circumvent these difficulties to support effective comprehension monitoring performance. The first study explored the cues that both at-risk and typical college readers use as a basis for their metacomprehension judgments in the context of a delayed-summarization paradigm. Improvement was seen in all readers, but at-risk readers did not reach the same level of metacomprehension accuracy as a sample of typical college readers. Further, whereas few readers reported using comprehension-related cues, more at-risk readers reported using surface-related cues as the basis for their judgments. To support the use of more predictive cues among the at-risk readers, a second study employed a concept-map intervention, which was intended to make situation-model level representations more salient. Concept mapping improved both the comprehension and metacomprehension accuracy of at-risk readers. The results suggest that poor metacomprehension accuracy can result from a failure to use appropriate cues for monitoring judgments, and that especially less-able readers need interventions that direct them to predictive cues for comprehension.