The Effect of Knowledge and Strategy Training on Monitoring Accuracy

By John L. Nietfeld, Gregory Schraw. 2002

201 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/93ad9747376c4b49c22b64fc4da8c0a1fabcef4e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Education

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Citations in the corpus

The effect of distributed monitoring exercises and feedback on performance, monitoring accuracy, and self-efficacy (2006, methodology): “Traditionally, this has been done using Likert scales but recently some have gone to more continuous measures of rating scales (Nietfeld & Schraw, 2002; Schraw, Potenza, & Nebelsick-Gullet, 1993).”
Explaining calibration accuracy in classroom contexts: the effects of incentives, reflection, and explanatory style (2008, background): “In a laboratory study conducted by Nietfeld and Schraw (2002) , participants increased their monitoring accuracy after receiving short-term strategy training that did not require participants to explicitly monitor their training.”
Self-confidence and metacognitive processes (2007, background): “Nietfeld and Schraw (2002) reported stronger correlations between a Mathematics self-efficacy questionnaire and confidence ratings assigned to RPM and a Probability Test (correlations ranged from r=.31 to r=.44, pb .05).”
Improving metacognition in the classroom through instruction, training, and feedback (2016, result): “Interestingly, our findings are contrary to a lot of the experimental research that indicates that metacognitive training (Nietfeld and Schraw 2002), performance feedback (Schraw et al.”
The Role of Teacher Epistemic Cognition, Epistemic Beliefs, and Calibration in Instruction (2008, background): “In addition, the literature on calibration, the match between confidence judgments and actual process or performance (Nietfeld and Schraw 2002), can illuminate how these epistemic considerations may influence cognition, by investigating a mechanism through which individuals evaluate their knowledge ”
Metacognitive calibration—an extended conceptualization and potential applications (2009, background): “Common criterion tests include (but are not limited to): (1) cued recall of paired associates (Dunlosky and Hertzog 2000; Nelson and Dunlosky 1991), (2) verbatim or idea recognition (Glenberg et al. 1987; Weingardt et al. 1994), (3) multiple-choice quizzes (Burson et al. 2006; Winne and Muis 2004), ”
A Theoretical Review of Winne and Hadwin’s Model of Self-Regulated Learning: New Perspectives and Directions (2007, background): “Nietfeld and Schraw (2002) found that higher prior knowledge predicted better performance, but the question remains as to how this occurs.”
A situated metacognitive model of the entrepreneurial mindset (2010, background): “Second, metacognition can be developed through training (Nietfeld and Schraw, 2002; Mevarech, 1999) and intensified or dampened by the nature of the context.”
A Measure of Adaptive Cognition for Entrepreneurship Research (2009, background): “…implications for the pedagogy of entrepreneurship and teaching in general, and these implications can be realized given that research has repeatedly demonstrated that metacognition can be taught, and cognitive adaptability enhanced (Mevarech, 1999; Nietfeld & Schraw, 2002; Schmidt & Ford, 2003).”
Metacognition in education: A focus on calibration. (2008, result): “…shown that improvements are difficult to obtain or are not durable (e.g., Bol & Hacker, 2001; Bol et al., 2005; Koriat, 1997; Nietfeld et al., 2005; Nietfeld & Schraw, 2002), whereas other studies have shown that various types of intervention can lead to improvements (e.g., Glenberg, Sanocki,…”
Using strategy instruction and confidence judgments to improve metacognitive monitoring (2009, methodology): “Recently, researchers have started using more continuous scales to measure adults’ calibration rather than Likert scales because they can provide more precise measurements and are more sensitive to differences that exist between ratings ( Nietfeld and Schraw 2002; Schraw et al. 1993).”
Metacognition, Need for Cognition and Use of Explanations during Ongoing Learning and Problem Solving. (2005, background): “Studies suggest that explanatory-based feedback has this effect, in part, because it enables individuals to better monitor their performance (Nietfeld & Schraw, 2002) and to discover, 1041-6080/$ - see front matter D 2005 Elsevier Inc.”
Metacognition, Self Regulation, and Self-regulated Learning: A Rose by any other Name? (2008, background): “Calibrating the relation between affect, such as confidence judgments, and actual process or performance is an area to be explored ( Nietfeld and Schraw 2002 ).”