|
|
|
| The influence and mechanism of text features on the metacomprehension monitoring accuracy |
| JIA Ruihong, YAO Bei, WEI Jie, YUAN Li, GU Yaxin, MA Xiaofeng |
| School of Psychology, Northwest Normal University, Lanzhou 730070; Key Laboratory of Behavioral and Mental Health of Gansu Province |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Accurate metacomprehension monitoring is a prerequisite for successful self-regulated learning. Existing studies have shown that the accuracy of individual metacomprehension monitoring is generally low and text features are important influencing factors, including text difficulty, text genre, text presentation mode and so on. Based on the review of existing researches, the influence of text features on the metacomprehension monitoring accuracy and its internal mechanism is discussed, and pointed out future research directions in this field. For example, the moderation of text difficulty on text features and the metacomprehension monitoring accuracy, the interaction between text features and learner features and use uniform standards to measure individual’s metaconcomprehension monitoring accuracy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] 陈启山. (2007). 元理解监控的精确性及其延迟关键词效应.心理科学进展, 15(2), 105-110.
[2] 陈启山, 常蕤. (2009). 读者的元理解监测为什么不精确?心理科学进展, 17(4), 706-713.
[3] 贾宁, 代景华. (2012). 小学高年级学生的学习判断绝对准确性及预见偏差.心理发展与教育, 28(1), 7.
[4] 王晓庄, 白学军. (2009). 判断与决策中的锚定效应.心理科学进展, (1), 37-43.
[5] Ackerman, R., & Goldsmith, M. (2011). Metacognitive regulation of text learning: On screen versus on paper.Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied, 17(1), 18-32.
[6] Ackerman, R., & Lauterman, T. (2012). Taking reading comprehension exams on screen or on paper? A metacognitive analysis of learning texts under time pressure.Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1816-1828.
[7] Agler L. M. L., Noguchi K., & Alfsen L. K. (2019). Personality traits as predictors of reading comprehension and metacomprehension accuracy.Current Psychology, 1-10.
[8] Alawneh, S., & Yadak, S. (2016). The impact of text type and difficulty on metacomprehension among 10th grade students.International Journal of Education and Practice, 4(3), 90-105.
[9] Alexander P. A., Fox E., Maggioni L., Loughlin S. M., & Dumas D. (2012). Reading into the future: Competence for the 21st century.Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 259.
[10] Bannert M., Sonnenberg C., Mengelkamp C., & Pieger E. (2015). Short-and long-term effects of students’ self-directed metacognitive prompts on navigation behavior and learning performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 293-306.
[11] Clinton V., Taylor T., Bajpayee S., Seipel B., & Davison M. L. (2020). Inferential comprehension differences between narrative and expository texts: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Reading and Writing, 33, 5-6.
[12] Clinton, Virginia (2019). Reading from paper compared to screens: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of Research in Reading, 1-38.
[13] Commander N. E., Zhao Y., Li H., Zabrucky K. M., & Agler L.-M. L. (2014). American and Chinese students’ calibration of comprehension and performance.Current Psychology, 33(4), 655-671.
[14] Dahan Golan D., Barzillai M., & Katzir T. (2018). The effect of presentation mode on children’s reading preferences, performance, and self evaluations.Computers & Education, 126, 346-358.
[15] Daniel, D. B., & Woody, W. D. (2013). E-textbooks at what cost? Performance and use of electronic v. print texts.Computers & Education, 62, 18-23.
[16] Denton C. A., Enos M., York M. J., Francis D. J., Barnes M. A., Kulesz P. A., et al. (2015). Text-processing differences in adolescent adequate and poor comprehenders reading accessible and challenging narrative and informational text.Reading Research Quarterly, 50, 393-416.
[17] Devolder A., Braak J. V., & Tondeur J. (2012). Supporting self-regulated learning in computer-based learning environments: Systematic review of effects of scaffolding in the domain of science education.Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28, 557-573.
[18] 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 & Aging, 21(2), 390-400.
[19] Dunlosky, J., & Rawson, K. A. (2012). Overconfidence produces underachievement: Inaccurate self evaluations undermine students’ learning and retention.Learning and Instruction, 22(4), 271-280.
[20] 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 & Language, 52(4), 551-565.
[21] 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.
[22] Golke S., Hagen R., & Wittwer J. (2019). Lost in narrative? The effect of informative narratives on text comprehension and metacomprehension accuracy.Learning & Instruction, 60, 1-19.
[23] Graesser A. C., Mcnamara D. S., & Kulikowich J. M. (2011). Coh-metrix: Providing multilevel analyses of text characteristics.Educational Researcher, 40(5), 223-234.
[24] Graesser A. C., McNamara D. S., Louwerse M. M., & Cai Z. (2004). Coh-metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 36, 193-202.
[25] Griffin T. D., Jee B. D., & Wiley J. (2009). The effects of domain knowledge on metacomprehension accuracy.Memory & Cognition, 37(7), 1001-1013.
[26] Griffin T. D., Mielicki M. K., & Wiley, J. (2019). Improving students’ metacomprehension accuracy. In J. Dunlosky, & K. A. Rawson (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of cognition and education (1st ed., pp. 619-646). Cambridge University Press.
[27] Griffin T. D., Wiley J., & Salas C. R. (2013). Supporting effective self-regulated learning: The critical role of monitoring. In R. Azevedo, & V. Aleven (Eds.), International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies, 28 pp. (19-34). Springer
[28] 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 & Cognition, 36(1), 93-103.
[29] Griffin T. D., Wiley J., & Thiede K. W. (2019). The effects of comprehension-test expectancies on metacomprehension accuracy.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 45(6), 1066-1092.
[30] Halamish, V., & Elbaz, E. (2020). Children’s reading comprehension and metacomprehension on screen versus on paper.Computers & Education, 145(Feb), 1-11.
[31] Jaeger, A. J., & Wiley, J. (2014). Do illustrations help or harm metacomprehension accuracy? Learning and Instruction, 34, 58-73.
[32] Ikeda, K., & Kitagami, S. (2013). The interactive effect of working memory and text difficulty on metacomprehension accuracy.Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25(1), 94-106.
[33] Katherine, Rawson, John, & Dunlosky. (2002). Are performance predictions for text based on ease of processing? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28(1),69-80.
[34] Kintsch, W., & Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition.Comprehension A Paradigm for Cognition, 10(1), 570.
[35] Koriat, & Asher. (1997). Monitoring one’s own knowledge during study: A cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 126(4), 349-370.
[36] León J. A., Martínez-Huertas J. N., Olmos R., Moreno D., & Escudero I. (2019). Metacomprehension skills depend on the type of text: An analysis from Differential Item Functioning.Psicothema, 31(1), 66-72.
[37] Lin L. M., Zabrucky K. M., & Moore D. (2002). Effects of text difficulty and adults’ age on relative calibration of comprehension.American Journal of Psychology, 115(2), 187-198.
[38] Linderholm T., Wang X., Therriault D., Qin Z., & Jakiel L. (2012). The accuracy of metacomprehension judgments: The biasing effect of text order.Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 10(1), 111-128.
[39] Linderholm T., Zhao Q., Therriault D. J., & Cordell-Mcnulty K. (2008). Metacomprehension effects situated within an anchoring and adjustment framework.Metacognition & Learning, 3(3), 175-188.
[40] Madison, E. M., & Fulton, E. K. (2022). The influence of summary modality on metacomprehension accuracy.Metacognition and Learning, 17(6), 117-138.
[41] 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(4), 723-731.
[42] Margolin, & Sara, J. (2013). Can bold typeface improve readers’ comprehension and metacomprehension of negation? Reading Psychology, 34(1), 85-99.
[43] Margolin, S. J., amp, & Hover, P. A. (2011). Metacomprehension and negation: Assessing readersa awareness of the difficulty of negated text.Reading Psychology, 32(2), 158-171.
[44] Margolin, S. J., & Brackins, T. (2020). Comprehension and metacomprehension of negated text: Is retrieval practice beneficial for understanding?Written Language & Literacy, 23(1), 92-108.
[45] Margolin, S. J. (2018). Cognitively active older adults’ comprehension and metacomprehension of negated text. Experimental Aging Research, 1-9.
[46] Margolin, S. J., & Snyder, N. (2017). It may not be that difficult the second time around: The effects of rereading on the comprehension and metacomprehension of negated text.Journal of Research in Reading, 41(2), 392-402.
[47] Martin N. D., Nguyen K., & McDaniel M. A. (2016). Structure building differences influence learning from educational text: Effects on encoding, retention, and metacognitive control.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 46, 52-60.
[48] Müller, Nadja M. Seufert, Tina(2018). Effects of self-regulation prompts in hypermedia learning on learning performance and self-efficacy.Learning and Instruction, 58, 1-11.
[49] Norman, E., & Furnes, B. (2016). The relationship between metacognitive experiences and learning: Is there a difference between digital and non-digital study media?Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 301-309.
[50] Panadero, E. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research.Frontiers in Psychology, 8(422), 1-28.
[51] Pieger E., Mengelkamp C., & Bannert M. (2016). Metacognitive judgments and disfluency-Does disfluency lead to more accurate judgments, better control, and better performance? Learning and Instruction, 44, 31-40.
[52] Prinz A., Golke S., & Wittwer J. (2020). How accurately can learners discriminate their comprehension of texts? A comprehensive meta-analysis on relative metacomprehension accuracy and influencing factors.Educational Research Review, 31(8), 100358-100389.
[53] Rawson K. A., Dunlosky J., & Thiede K. W. (2000). The rereading effect: Metacomprehension accuracy improves across reading trials.Memory & Cognition, 28(6), 1004-1010.
[54] Shafeq, Alawneh., & Safaa, Yadak. (2016). The impact of text type and difficulty on metacomprehension among 10th grade students.International Journal of Education and Practice, 4(3), 90-105.
[55] Shiu, L., & Chen, Q. (2013). Self and external monitoring of reading comprehension.Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(1), 78-88.
[56] Sidi Y., Shpigelman M., Zalmanov H., & Ackerman R. (2017). Understanding metacognitive inferiority on screen by exposing cues for depth of processing.Learning and Instruction, 51, 61-73.
[57] Thiede, K. W., & Anderson, M. C. M. (2003). Summarizing can improve metacomprehension accuracy.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28(2), 129-160.
[58] 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 in education,(85-106). New York: Routledge.
[59] Thiede K. W., Redford J. S., Wiley J., & Griffin T. D. (2012). Elementary school experience with comprehension testing may influence metacomprehension accuracy among seventh and eighth graders.Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 554-564.
[60] Vossing J., Stamov-Rossnagel C., & Heinitz K. (2016). Images in computer-supported learning: Increasing their benefits for metacomprehension through judgments of learning.Computers in Human Behavior, 58, 221-230.
[61] Voessing J., Stamov-Rossnagel C., & Heinitz K. (2017). Text difficulty affects metacomprehension accuracy and knowledge test performance in text learning.Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(3), 282-291.
[62] Weaver, C. A., & Bryant, D. S. (1995). Monitoring of comprehension: The role of text difficulty in metamemory for narrative and expository text.Memory & Cognition, 23(1), 12.
[63] Wiley J., Griffin T. D., Jaeger A. J., Jarosz A. F., Cushen P. J., & Thiede K. W. (2016). Improving metacomprehension accuracy in an undergraduate course context.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 22(4), 393-405.
[64] Wiley J., Griffin T. D., & Thiede K. W. (2016). Improving metacomprehension with the situation-model approach. In K. Mokhtari (Ed.),Improving reading comprehension through metacognitive reading strategies instruction(pp. 93-110).
[65] Zhao, Q., & Linderholm, T. (2008). Adult metacomprehension: Judgment processes and accuracy constraints.Educational Psychology Review, 20(2), 191-206. |
|
|
|
