↓ Skip to main content

Unskilled but subjectively aware: Metacognitive monitoring ability and respective awareness in low-performing students

Overview of attention for article published in Memory & Cognition, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
Title
Unskilled but subjectively aware: Metacognitive monitoring ability and respective awareness in low-performing students
Published in
Memory & Cognition, October 2015
DOI 10.3758/s13421-015-0552-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marion Händel, Eva S. Fritzsche

Abstract

Two studies were conducted to further examine the unskilled-and-unaware effect and to test whether low-performing students are indeed unaware of their (expected) lower metacognitive monitoring abilities. Postdicted judgments of performance and second-order judgments (SOJs) were solicited to test students' metacognitive awareness. Given that global and local judgments tend to differ (the confidence-frequency effect), we investigated whether students' (un)awareness pertains to both types of judgments. A first study focusing on global judgments was conducted in a regular exam setting with 196 undergraduate education students. A second study with 115 undergraduate education students examined both global and local judgments. Local judgments were analyzed on an average level and according to different signal detection theory categories (hits, correct rejections, misses, and false alarms). In both studies, students were grouped in four performance quartiles. The results showed that low-performing students highly overestimated their performance (they were functionally overconfident). However, their SOJs indicated that they were less confident in their judgments than the other students, and thus seemed to be aware of their low ability to estimate their own performance (they were not subjectively overconfident). This was observed for global as well as for averaged local SOJs. Moreover, an analysis of the local judgments revealed that students' SOJs varied depending not only on whether their judgments were accurate but also on whether or not they thought they knew the answer to an item. In sum, SOJs provide valuable information about students' metacognitive awareness.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
Unknown 62 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 11 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 16%
Student > Master 8 13%
Lecturer 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 14 22%
Unknown 10 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 20 32%
Social Sciences 14 22%
Linguistics 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 14 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 September 2016.
All research outputs
#6,347,758
of 22,851,489 outputs
Outputs from Memory & Cognition
#402
of 1,573 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,960
of 277,528 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Memory & Cognition
#5
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,851,489 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,573 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,528 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.