Monitoring accuracy and control processes during problem solving – An overview

Being able to accurately monitor one’s own performance (i.e., keep track of learning process) is crucial for self-regulation, especially when learning from problem-solving tasks. Effective monitoring depends on students’ ability to use cues that are predictive for performance. These cues may include, for example, domain prior knowledge, which have been shown to have a positive relationship with monitoring accuracy. Inaccurate monitoring can lead to ineffective control, which may be harmful to the learning outcomes. As such, both accurate monitoring and adequate control seem to be crucial for effective self-regulation when learning from problem-solving tasks. Although problem-solving tasks play an important role in education, only very few studies have investigated the link between monitoring accuracy, control decisions, and performance in the context of problem solving. This paper reviews and discusses the findings of the existing research on monitoring and control in problem-solving tasks, while exploring the limitations of these studies as well as areas for future research.

[1]  Anique B. H. de Bruin,et al.  Effects of problem solving after worked example study on secondary school children’s monitoring accuracy , 2017 .

[2]  David J. Therriault,et al.  Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts. , 2003 .

[3]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  Judgment and decision making. , 2012, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[4]  Evan Heit,et al.  Judgments of learning and improvement , 2010, Memory & cognition.

[5]  John L. Nietfeld,et al.  Using strategy instruction and confidence judgments to improve metacognitive monitoring , 2009 .

[6]  A. Glenberg,et al.  Inexpert calibration of comprehension , 1987, Memory & cognition.

[7]  Jennifer Wiley,et al.  Metacognitive Monitoring During and After Reading , 2009 .

[8]  Matthew G. Rhodes,et al.  The influence of delaying judgments of learning on metacognitive accuracy: a meta-analytic review. , 2011, Psychological bulletin.

[9]  Gregory Schraw.  A conceptual analysis of five measures of metacognitive monitoring , 2009 .

[10]  Patricia A. Alexander,et al.  Calibration: What Is It and Why It Matters? An Introduction to the Special Issue on Calibrating Calibration. , 2013 .

[11]  Fred Paas,et al.  Effects of Problem Solving after Worked Example Study on Primary School Children's Monitoring Accuracy , 2014 .

[12]  T. O. Nelson,et al.  Do different metamemory judgments tap the same underlying aspects of memory? , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[13]  A. Koriat.  Monitoring one's own knowledge during study : A cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning , 1997 .

[14]  J. Dunlosky,et al.  Metacomprehension A Brief History and How to Improve Its Accuracy , 2007 .

[15]  John Dunlosky,et al.  Four Cornerstones of Calibration Research: Why Understanding Students' Judgments Can Improve Their Achievement , 2013 .

[16]  John Dunlosky,et al.  Overconfidence produces underachievement: Inaccurate self evaluations undermine students’ learning and retention , 2012 .

[17]  A Koriat,et al.  How do we know that we know? The accessibility model of the feeling of knowing. , 1993, Psychological review.

[18]  J. Metcalfe,et al.  Evidence that judgments of learning are causally related to study choice , 2008, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[19]  Philip H. Winne,et al.  Studying as self-regulated learning. , 1998 .

[20]  T. O. Nelson,et al.  Multiple study trials and judgments of learning. , 2003, Acta psychologica.

[21]  Maria Bannert,et al.  Metacognitive judgments and disfluency – Does disfluency lead to more accurate judgments, better control, and better performance? , 2016 .

[22]  Gregory Schraw,et al.  The Effect of Knowledge and Strategy Training on Monitoring Accuracy , 2002 .

[23]  T. Gog,et al.  Effects of training self-assessment and using assessment standards on retrospective and prospective monitoring of problem solving , 2014 .

[24]  C. Mengelkamp,et al.  Effects of induced levels of prior knowledge on monitoring accuracy and performance when learning from self-regulated problem solving. , 2020 .

[25]  T. O. Nelson.  Consciousness and metacognition. , 1996 .

[26]  J. Sweller.  Evolution of human cognitive architecture , 2003 .

[27]  Fred Paas,et al.  The Association between Motivation, Affect, and Self-regulated Learning When Solving Problems , 2017, Front. Psychol..

[28]  John Dunlosky,et al.  Agenda-based regulation of study-time allocation: when agendas override item-based monitoring. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[29]  T. O. Nelson,et al.  Allocation of self-paced study time and the "labor-in-vain effect". , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[30]  Asher Koriat,et al.  The relationships between monitoring, regulation and performance , 2012 .

[31]  J. Metcalfe,et al.  Metacognition : knowing about knowing , 1994 .

[32]  T. Gog,et al.  Training self-assessment and task-selection skills: A cognitive approach to improving self-regulated learning , 2012 .

[33]  Fred Paas,et al.  Completion problems can reduce the illusions of understanding in a computer-based learning environment on genetics , 2015 .

[34]  T. O. Nelson,et al.  Why investigate metacognition , 1994 .

[35]  R. Atkinson,et al.  Structuring the Transition From Example Study to Problem Solving in Cognitive Skill Acquisition: A Cognitive Load Perspective , 2003 .

[36]  Allyson F. Hadwin,et al.  Calibration in goal setting: Examining the nature of judgments of confidence , 2013 .

[37]  Fred Paas,et al.  Completion of partially worked-out examples as a generation strategy for improving monitoring accuracy , 2013 .

[38]  Daniel L. Dinsmore,et al.  What are confidence judgments made of? Students' explanations for their confidence ratings and what that means for calibration , 2013 .

[39]  Lisa K. Son,et al.  Metacognitive and control strategies in study-time allocation. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[40]  T. O. Nelson,et al.  When People's Judgments of Learning (JOLs) are Extremely Accurate at Predicting Subsequent Recall: The “Delayed-JOL Effect” , 1991 .

[41]  R. Bjork,et al.  Self-regulated learning: beliefs, techniques, and illusions. , 2013, Annual review of psychology.

[42]  Rakefet Ackerman,et al.  Meta-reasoning: What can we learn from meta-memory? , 2014 .

[43]  Fred Paas,et al.  Self-assessment and task selection in learner-controlled instruction: Differences between effective and ineffective learners , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[44]  W. Schnotz,et al.  Accuracy of metacognitive judgments as a moderator of learner control effectiveness in problem-solving tasks , 2017 .

[45]  Benjamin D. Jee,et al.  The effects of domain knowledge on metacomprehension accuracy , 2009, Memory & cognition.

[46]  Troy A. Smith,et al.  Does delaying judgments of learning really improve the efficacy of study decisions? Not so much. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[47]  T. O. Nelson.  Metamemory: A Theoretical Framework and New Findings , 1990 .

[48]  R. Atkinson.  Optimizing learning from examples using animated pedagogical agents. , 2002 .

[49]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  Instructional design models for well-structured and III-structured problem-solving learning outcomes , 1997 .