Metacognition and Learning

, Volume 1, Issue 1, pp 3–14 | Cite as

Metacognition and learning: conceptual and methodological considerations

  • Marcel V. J. VeenmanEmail author
  • Bernadette H. A. M. Van Hout-Wolters
  • Peter Afflerbach
Theoretical Article


Methodological Consideration 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Afflerbach, P. (1990). The influence of prior knowledge on expert readers' main idea construction strategies. Reading Research Quarterly, 25, 31–46.Google Scholar
  2. Afflerbach, P. (2000). Verbal reports and protocol analysis. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research. Volume III (pp. 163–179). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  3. Afflerbach, P., Pearson, D., & Paris, S. (in preparation). Clarifying differences between reading skills and strategies.Google Scholar
  4. Alexander, P. A., Schallert, D. L., & Hare, V. C. (1991). Coming to terms: How researchers in learning and literacy talk about knowledge. Review of Educational Research, 61, 315–343.Google Scholar
  5. Alexander, J. M., Carr, M. & Schwanenflugel, P. J. (1995). Development of metacognition in gifted children: Directions for future research. Developmental Review, 15, 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baker, L. (1994). Fostering metacognitive development. In H. W. Reese (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior. Vol. 25 (pp. 201–239). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bandura, A. (1989). Regulation of cognitive processes through perceived self-efficacy. Developmental Psychology, 25, 729–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Berk, L. E. (2003). Child Development (6th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  9. Boekaerts, M. (1997). Self-regulated learning: A new concept embraced by researchers, policy makers, educators, teachers, and students. Learning and Instruction, 7, 161–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Borkowski, J. G. (1992). Metacognitive theory: A framework for teaching literacy, writing, and math skills. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 253–257.Google Scholar
  11. Brown, A. L. (1978). Knowing when, where, and how to remember: A problem of metacognition. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology, Vol. 1 (pp. 77–165). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  12. Brown, A. L., & DeLoache, J. S. (1978). Skills, plans, and self-regulation. In R. S. Siegel (Ed.), Children's thinking: What develops? (pp. 3–35). Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  13. Brown, A. L., & Palincsar, A. S. (1987). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension skills: A natural history of one program for enhancing learning. In J. D. Day, & J. G. Borkowski (Eds.). Intelligence and exceptionality: New directions for theory, assessment, and instructional practices (pp. 81–131). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  14. Desoete, A., & Roeyers, H. (2003). Can off-line metacognition enhance mathematical problem solving? Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 188–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dunlosky, J., & Nelson, T. O. (1992). Importance of the kind of cue for judgment of learning (JOL) and the delayed-JOL effect. Memory & Cognition, 20, 374–380.Google Scholar
  16. Efklides, A., & Vauras, M. (1999). Introduction. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14, 455–459.Google Scholar
  17. Elshout-Mohr, M., Van Hout-Wolters, B., & Broekkamp, H. (1999). Mapping situations in classroom and research: Eight types of instructional-learning episodes. Learning and Instruction, 9, 57–75.Google Scholar
  18. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring. American Psychologist, 34, 906–911.Google Scholar
  19. Flavell, J. H. (2004). Theory-of-mind development: Retrospect and prospect. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 50, 274–290.Google Scholar
  20. Flavell, J. H., & Wellman, H. M. (1977). Metamemory. In R. V. Kail, & J. W. Hagen (Eds.), Perspectives on the development of memory and cognition (pp. 3–33). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  21. Glaser, R., Schauble, L., Raghavan, K., & Zeitz, C. (1992). Scientific reasoning across different domains. In E de Corte, M. C. Linn, H. Mandl, & L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Computer-based learning environments and problem solving (NATO ASI series F, Vol. 84, pp. 345–371). Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  22. Harris, K. R., Reid, R. R., & Graham, S. (2004). Self-regulation among students with LD and ADHD. In B. Y. L. Wong (Ed.), Learning about learning disabilities, 3rd ed. (pp. 167–195). San Diego: Elsevier Academic Press.Google Scholar
  23. Kelemen, W. L., Frost, P. J., & Weaver III, C. A. (2000). Individual differences in metacognition: Evidence against a general metacognitive ability. Memory & Cognition, 28, 92–107.Google Scholar
  24. Kinnunen, R., & Vauras, M. (1995). Comprehension monitoring and the level of comprehension in high- and low-achieving primary school children's reading. Learning and Instruction, 5, 143–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kluwe, R. H. (1987). Executive decisions and regulation of problem solving behavior. In F. E. Weinert, & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 31–64). Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  26. Kramarski, B., & Mevarech, Z. R. (2003). Enhancing mathematical reasoning in the classroom: The effects of cooperative learning and metacognitive training. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 281–310.Google Scholar
  27. Kuhn, D. (1999). Metacognitive development. In L. Balter & C. S. Tamis-LeMonda (Eds.), Child psychology. A handbook of contemporary issues (pp. 259–286). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  28. Leutner, D., & Leopold, C. (2000). Selbstreguliertes Lernen als Selbstregulation von Lernstrategien-Ein Trainingsexperiment mit Berufstätigen zum Lernen aus Sachtexten. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 31, 38–56.Google Scholar
  29. Mason, L., & Scrivani, L. (2004). Enhancing students' mathematical beliefs: An intervention study. Learning and Instruction, 14, 153–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Masui, C., & de Corte, E. (1999). Enhancing learning and problem solving skills: Orienting and self-judging, two powerful and trainable learning tools. Learning and Instruction, 9, 517–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Meijer, J., Veenman, M. V. J. & Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. (in press). Metacognitive activities in text studying and problem solving: Development of a taxonomy. Educational Research and Evaluation.Google Scholar
  32. Metcalfe, J., & Shimamura, A. P. (Eds.) (1994). Metacognition. Knowing about knowing. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  33. Nelson, T. O. (1996). Consciousness and metacognition. American Psychologist, 51, 102–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nist, S. L., Simpson, M. L., & Olejnik, S. (1991). The relation between self-selected study processes and test performance. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 849–874.Google Scholar
  35. Otero, J., Campanario, J. M., & Hopkins, K. D. (1992). The relationship between academic achievement and metacognitive comprehension monitoring ability of Spanish secondary school students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 419–430.Google Scholar
  36. Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, S. (Eds.) (2002). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. Washington DC: National Research Center.Google Scholar
  37. Pinon, K, Allain, P., Kefi, M. Z., Dubas, F., & Le Gall, D. (2005). Monitoring processes and metamemory experience in patients with dysexecutive syndrome. Brain and Cognition, 57, 185–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated leaning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education. Theory, research, and applications, (2nd ed). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  40. Pressley, M. (2000). Development of grounded theories of complex cognitive processing: Exhaustive within- and between study analyses of thinking-aloud data. In G. Schraw, & J. C. Impara (Eds.), Issues in the measurement of metacognition (pp. 262–296). Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.Google Scholar
  41. Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  42. Reder, L. M. (1996). Implicit Memory and Metacognition. Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  43. Salomon, G., & Perkins, D. N. (1989). Rocky roads to transfer: Rethinking mechanisms of a neglected phenomenon. Educational Psychologist, 24, 113–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Schnotz, W. (1992). Metacognition and self regulation in text processing: Some comments. In M. Carretero, M. L. Pope, R. J. Simons, & J. I. Pozo (Eds.), Learning and instruction. European research in an international context, Vol. 3 (pp. 365–375). Elsmford, NY: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  45. Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7, 351–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schraw, G., & Nietfeld, J. (1998). A further test of the general monitoring skill hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 236–248.Google Scholar
  47. Schraw, G., Dunkle, M. E., Bendixen, L. D., & Roedel, T. D. (1995). Does a general monitoring skill exist? Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 433–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sternberg, R. J. (1990). Metaphors of the mind: Conceptions of the nature of intelligence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Swanson, H. L., Christie, L. and Rubadeau, R. J. (1993). The Relationship between metacognition and analogical reasoning in mentally retarded, learning disabled, average, and gifted children. Learning Disabilities Research, 8, 70–81.Google Scholar
  50. Thomas, G. (2003). Conceptualisation, development and validation of an instrument for investigating the metacognitive orientations of science classroom learning environments: The Metacognitive Orientation Learning Environment Scale–Science (MOLES–S). Learning Environment Research, 6, 175–197.Google Scholar
  51. Thorpe, K. J., & Satterly, D. J. H. (1990). The development and inter-relationship of metacognitive components among primary school children. Educational Psychology, 10, 5–21.Google Scholar
  52. Tobias, S., & Everson, H. T. (1997). Studying the relationship between affective and metacognitive variables. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 10, 59–81.Google Scholar
  53. Van Hout-Wolters, B. (2000). Assessing active self-directed learning. In: R. Simons, J. van der Linden, & T. Duffy (Eds.), New learning (pp. 83–101). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  54. Van Kraayenoord, C. E., & Schneider, W. E. (1999). Reading achievement, metacognition, reading self-concept and interest: A study of German students in grade 3 and 4. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14, 305–324.Google Scholar
  55. Veenman, M. V. J. (1998). Kennis en vaardigheden; Soorten kennis een vaardigheden die relevant zijn voor reken-wiskunde taken. [Knowledge and skills that are relevant to math tasks]. In A. Andeweg, J. E. H. van Luit, M. V. J. Veenman, & P. C. M. Vendel, (Eds.), Hulp bij leerproblemen; Rekenen-wiskunde (pp. G0050.1–13). Alphen a/d Rijn: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  56. Veenman, M. V. J. (2005). The assessment of metacognitive skills: What can be learned from multi-method designs? In C. Artelt, & B. Moschner (Eds), Lernstrategien und Metakognition: Implikationen für Forschung und Praxis (pp. 75–97). Berlin: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  57. Veenman, M. V. J., & Beishuizen, J. J. (2004). Intellectual and metacognitive skills of novices while studying texts under conditions of text difficulty and time constraint. Learning and Instruction, 14, 619–638.Google Scholar
  58. Veenman, M. V. J., & Spaans, M. A. (2005). Relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills: Age and task differences. Learning and Individual Differences, 15, 159–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Veenman, M. V. J. & Verheij, J. (2003). Identifying technical students at risk: Relating general versus specific metacognitive skills to study success. Learning and Individual Differences, 13, 259–272.Google Scholar
  60. Veenman, M. V. J., Elshout, J. J., & Groen, M. G. M. (1993). Thinking aloud: Does it affect regulatory processes in learning. Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsresearch, 18, 322–330.Google Scholar
  61. Veenman, M. V. J., Elshout, J. J., & Busato, V. V. (1994). Metacognitive mediation in learning with computer-based simulations. Computers in Human Behavior, 10, 93–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Veenman, M. V. J., Elshout, J. J., & Meijer, J. (1997). The generality vs. domain-specificity of metacognitive skills in novice learning across domains. Learning and Instruction, 7, 187–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Veenman, M. V. J., Kerseboom, L, & Imthorn, C. (2000). Test anxiety and metacognitive skillfulness: Availability versus production deficiencies. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 13, 391–412.Google Scholar
  64. Veenman, M.V.J., Kok, R. & Kuilenburg, J. (2001). Intelligence and metacognitive skillfulness in secondary education. In F. Oser & U. Baets (Eds.), 9th European Conference on Learning and Instruction, Abstract Volume (pp. 166). Aachen: Mainz.Google Scholar
  65. Veenman, M. V. J., Prins, F. J., & Elshout, J. J. (2002). Initial learning in a complex computer simulated environment: The role of metacognitive skills and intellectual ability. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 327–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Veenman, M. V. J., Prins, F. J., & Verheij, J. (2003). Learning styles: Self-reports versus thinking-aloud measures. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 357–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Veenman, M. V. J., Wilhelm, P., & Beishuizen, J. J. (2004). The relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills from a developmental perspective. Learning and Instruction, 14, 89–109.Google Scholar
  68. Veenman, M. V. J., Kok, R., & Blöte, A. W. (2005). The relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills at the onset of metacognitive skill development. Instructional Science, 33, 193–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Volet, S. E. (1991). Modelling and coaching of relevant metacognitive strategies for enhancing university students' learning. Learning and Instruction, 1, 319–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wang, M. C., Haertel, G. D., & Walberg, H. J. (1990). What influences learning? A content analysis of review literature. Journal of Educational Research, 84, 30–43.Google Scholar
  71. Whitebread, D. (1999). Interactions between children's metacognitive abilities, working memory capacity, strategies and performance during problem-solving. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14, 489–507.Google Scholar
  72. Winne, P. H. (1996). A metacognitive view of individual differences in self-regulated learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 8, 327–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Zhang, L. J. (2001). Awareness in reading: EFL students' metacognitive knowledge of reading strategies in an acquisition-poor environment. Language Awareness, 10, 268–288.Google Scholar
  74. Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-regulation involves more than metacognition: A social cognitive perspective. Educational Psychologist, 30, 217–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 51–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Zohar, A. (1999). Teachers' metacognitive knowledge and the instruction of higher order thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 413–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marcel V. J. Veenman
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Bernadette H. A. M. Van Hout-Wolters
    • 2
  • Peter Afflerbach
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Developmental & Educational PsychologyLeiden UniversityLeidenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Graduate School of Teaching and LearningUniversity of AmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of Curriculum and InstructionUniversity of MarylandUSA

Personalised recommendations