Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research 4/2014

01-07-2014 | Original Article

Metacognitive monitoring of attention performance and its influencing factors

Auteurs: Ramona Kessel, Judith Gecht, Thomas Forkmann, Barbara Drueke, Siegfried Gauggel, Verena Mainz

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 4/2014

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

Metacognitive monitoring is a central element of metacognitive processing exerting widespread influences on information processing. Albeit being subject to numerous empirical investigations referring to memory performance, there is little research investigating metacognitive monitoring in other cognitive domains. The present study investigated in 45 healthy students whether factors that are known to influence monitoring of memory performance, i.e. task difficulty, time of assessment, and practice, also exhibit a significant impact on monitoring of attention performance. A multivariate analysis of variance with three within-subject repeated measures factors on two dependent variables (monitoring of (a) time, and (b) errors in an attention task) was conducted. Results showed that monitoring ability significantly decreased with increasing task difficulty, was significantly better for post than for pre-assessment, and significantly increased with practice. Therefore, results suggest that the examined factors influenced monitoring of attention performance equivalent to the influence of these factors found in metamemory research.
Voetnoten
1
Note that we included the most stringent correlation parameter of zero. Rerunning the power analysis with an expected intercorrelation >0 results in a smaller estimated sample size while simultaneously achieving the same power.
 
Literatuur
go back to reference Bäumler, G. (1985). Farbe-Wort-Interferenztest (FWIT) nach J. R. Stroop. Göttingen: Hogrefe. Bäumler, G. (1985). Farbe-Wort-Interferenztest (FWIT) nach J. R. Stroop. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
go back to reference Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
go back to reference Dunlap, W. P., Cortina, J. M., Vaslow, J. B., & Burke, M. J. (1996). Meta-analysis of experiments with matched groups or repeated measures designs. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 170–177.CrossRef Dunlap, W. P., Cortina, J. M., Vaslow, J. B., & Burke, M. J. (1996). Meta-analysis of experiments with matched groups or repeated measures designs. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 170–177.CrossRef
go back to reference Dunlosky, J., & Hertzog, C. (2000). Updating knowledge about strategy effectiveness: a componential analysis of learning about strategy effectiveness from task experience. Psychology and Aging, 15(3), 462–474.PubMedCrossRef Dunlosky, J., & Hertzog, C. (2000). Updating knowledge about strategy effectiveness: a componential analysis of learning about strategy effectiveness from task experience. Psychology and Aging, 15(3), 462–474.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Durlak, J. A. (2009). How to select, calculate, and interpret effect sizes. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 34(9), 917–928.PubMedCrossRef Durlak, J. A. (2009). How to select, calculate, and interpret effect sizes. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 34(9), 917–928.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Edwards, J. R. (1994). The study of congruence in organizational behavior research: critique and a proposed alternative. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 58(1), 51–100.CrossRef Edwards, J. R. (1994). The study of congruence in organizational behavior research: critique and a proposed alternative. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 58(1), 51–100.CrossRef
go back to reference Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191.PubMedCrossRef Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Fernandez-Duque, D., & Black, S. E. (2007). Metacognitive judgment and denial of deficit: evidence from frontotemporal dementia. Judgment and Decision Making, 2(5), 359–370. Fernandez-Duque, D., & Black, S. E. (2007). Metacognitive judgment and denial of deficit: evidence from frontotemporal dementia. Judgment and Decision Making, 2(5), 359–370.
go back to reference Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.CrossRef Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.CrossRef
go back to reference Glenberg, A. M., Sanocki, T., Epstein, W., & Morris, C. (1987). Enhancing calibration of comprehension. Journal of Eperimental Psychology: General, 116(2), 119–136. Glenberg, A. M., Sanocki, T., Epstein, W., & Morris, C. (1987). Enhancing calibration of comprehension. Journal of Eperimental Psychology: General, 116(2), 119–136.
go back to reference Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando: Academic Press. Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando: Academic Press.
go back to reference Holmbeck, G. N., Li, S. T., Schurman, J. V., Friedman, D., & Coakley, R. M. (2002). Collecting and managing multisource and multimethod data in studies of pediatric populations. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 27(1), 5–18.PubMedCrossRef Holmbeck, G. N., Li, S. T., Schurman, J. V., Friedman, D., & Coakley, R. M. (2002). Collecting and managing multisource and multimethod data in studies of pediatric populations. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 27(1), 5–18.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Irving, P. G., & Meyer, J. P. (1999). On using residual difference scores in the measurement of congruence: the case of met expectations research. Personnel Psychology, 52(1), 85–95.CrossRef Irving, P. G., & Meyer, J. P. (1999). On using residual difference scores in the measurement of congruence: the case of met expectations research. Personnel Psychology, 52(1), 85–95.CrossRef
go back to reference Kelemen, W. L., Frost, P. J., & Weaver, C. A. (2000). Individual differences in metacognition: evidence against a general metacognitive ability. Memory & Cognition, 28(1), 92–107.CrossRef Kelemen, W. L., Frost, P. J., & Weaver, C. A. (2000). Individual differences in metacognition: evidence against a general metacognitive ability. Memory & Cognition, 28(1), 92–107.CrossRef
go back to reference Koriat, A. (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.CrossRef Koriat, A. (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.CrossRef
go back to reference Koriat, A. (2007). Metacognition and consciousness. In P. D. Zelazo, M. Moscovitch, & E. Thompson (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of consciousness (pp. 289–325). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Koriat, A. (2007). Metacognition and consciousness. In P. D. Zelazo, M. Moscovitch, & E. Thompson (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of consciousness (pp. 289–325). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
go back to reference Koriat, A., & Shitzer-Reichert, R. (2002). Metacognitive judgments and their accuracy. In P. Chambres, M. Izaute, & P.-J. Marescaux (Eds.), Metacognition process, function and use (pp. 1–17). Norwell: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRef Koriat, A., & Shitzer-Reichert, R. (2002). Metacognitive judgments and their accuracy. In P. Chambres, M. Izaute, & P.-J. Marescaux (Eds.), Metacognition process, function and use (pp. 1–17). Norwell: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRef
go back to reference Maki, R. H., Jonas, D., & Kallod, M. (1994). The relationship between comprehension and metacomprehension ability. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1(1), 126–129.CrossRef Maki, R. H., Jonas, D., & Kallod, M. (1994). The relationship between comprehension and metacomprehension ability. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1(1), 126–129.CrossRef
go back to reference Marshall, M. J., & Wilsoncroft, W. E. (1989). Time perception and the Stroop task. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 69, 1159–1162.PubMedCrossRef Marshall, M. J., & Wilsoncroft, W. E. (1989). Time perception and the Stroop task. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 69, 1159–1162.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Mengelkamp, C., & Bannert, M. (2009). Judgements about knowledge, searching for factors that influence their validity. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 7(17), 163–190. Mengelkamp, C., & Bannert, M. (2009). Judgements about knowledge, searching for factors that influence their validity. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 7(17), 163–190.
go back to reference Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: a theoretical framework and new findings. In G. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 125–173). New York: Academic Press. Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: a theoretical framework and new findings. In G. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 125–173). New York: Academic Press.
go back to reference Perfect, T. J. (2002). When does eyewitness confidence predict performance? In T. J. Perfect & B. Schwartz (Eds.), Applied metacognition (pp. 95–120). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Perfect, T. J. (2002). When does eyewitness confidence predict performance? In T. J. Perfect & B. Schwartz (Eds.), Applied metacognition (pp. 95–120). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
go back to reference Roderer, T., & Roebers, C. M. (2010). Explicit and implicit confidence judgments and developmental differences in metamemory: an eye-tracking approach. Metacognition and Learning, 5, 229–250.CrossRef Roderer, T., & Roebers, C. M. (2010). Explicit and implicit confidence judgments and developmental differences in metamemory: an eye-tracking approach. Metacognition and Learning, 5, 229–250.CrossRef
go back to reference Schraw, G. (1997). The effect of generalized metacognitive knowledge on test performance and confidence judgments. The Journal of Experimental Education, 65(2), 135–146.CrossRef Schraw, G. (1997). The effect of generalized metacognitive knowledge on test performance and confidence judgments. The Journal of Experimental Education, 65(2), 135–146.CrossRef
go back to reference Schraw, G. (2009). Measuring metacognitive judgments. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 415–429). New York: Routledge. Schraw, G. (2009). Measuring metacognitive judgments. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 415–429). New York: Routledge.
go back to reference Schraw, G., Dunkle, M. E., Bendixen, L. D., & Roedel, T. D. (1995). Does a general monitoring skill exist? Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(3), 433–444.CrossRef Schraw, G., Dunkle, M. E., Bendixen, L. D., & Roedel, T. D. (1995). Does a general monitoring skill exist? Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(3), 433–444.CrossRef
go back to reference Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351–371.CrossRef Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351–371.CrossRef
go back to reference Schraw, G., & Roedel, T. D. (1994). Test difficulty and judgment bias. Memory & Cognition, 22(1), 63–69.CrossRef Schraw, G., & Roedel, T. D. (1994). Test difficulty and judgment bias. Memory & Cognition, 22(1), 63–69.CrossRef
go back to reference Shaughnesssy, J. J., & Zechmeister, E. B. (1992). Memory monitoring accuracy as influenced by the distribution of retrieval practice. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 30(2), 125–128.CrossRef Shaughnesssy, J. J., & Zechmeister, E. B. (1992). Memory monitoring accuracy as influenced by the distribution of retrieval practice. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 30(2), 125–128.CrossRef
go back to reference Wells, A. (2000). Emotional disorders and metacognition: innovative cognitive therapy. Chichester: Wiley. Wells, A. (2000). Emotional disorders and metacognition: innovative cognitive therapy. Chichester: Wiley.
go back to reference Yeung, N., & Summerfield, C. (2012). Metacognition in human decision-making: confidence and error monitoring. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 367(1594), 1310–1321.CrossRef Yeung, N., & Summerfield, C. (2012). Metacognition in human decision-making: confidence and error monitoring. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 367(1594), 1310–1321.CrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
Metacognitive monitoring of attention performance and its influencing factors
Auteurs
Ramona Kessel
Judith Gecht
Thomas Forkmann
Barbara Drueke
Siegfried Gauggel
Verena Mainz
Publicatiedatum
01-07-2014
Uitgeverij
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Gepubliceerd in
Psychological Research / Uitgave 4/2014
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-013-0511-y

Andere artikelen Uitgave 4/2014

Psychological Research 4/2014 Naar de uitgave