Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The impact of retrieval processes, age, general achievement level, and test scoring scheme for children’s metacognitive monitoring and controlling

  • Published:
Metacognition and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This multi-phase study examined the influence of retrieval processes on children’s metacognitive processes in relation to and in interaction with achievement level and age. First, N = 150 9/10- and 11/12-year old high and low achievers watched an educational film and predicted their test performance. Children then solved a cloze test regarding the film content including answerable and unanswerable items and gave confidence judgments to every answer. Finally, children withdrew answers that they believed to be incorrect. All children showed adequate metacognitive processes before and during test taking with 11/12- year-olds outperforming 9/10-year-olds when considering characteristics of on-going retrieval processes. As to the influence of achievement level, high compared to low achievers proved to be more accurate in their metacognitive monitoring and controlling. Results suggest that both cognitive resources (operationalized through achievement level) and mnemonic experience (assessed through age) fuel metacognitive development. Nevertheless, when facing higher demands regarding retrieval processes, experience seems to play the more important role.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ackerman, A., & Goldsmith, M. (2008). Control over grain size in memory reporting—with and without satisfying knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 34, 1224–1245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boekaerts, M. (1999). Metacognitive experiences and motivational state as aspects of self-awareness: Review and discussion. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14, 571–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ceci, S. J., Fitneva, S. A., & Williams, W. M. (2010). Representational constraints on the development of memory and metamemory: A developmental-representational theory. Psychological Review, 117, 464–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coffman, J. L., Ornstein, P. A., McCall, L. E., & Curran, P. J. (2008). Linking teacher’s memory-relevant language and the development of children’s memory skills. Developmental Psychology, 44, 1640–1654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky, J., & Bjork, R. A. (2008). Handbook of metamemory and memory. New York: Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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, 175–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feindberg, A. B., & Shapiro, E. S. (2003). Accuracy of teacher judgments in predicting oral reading fluency. School Psychology Quarterly, 18, 52–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldsmith, M., & Koriat, A. (2008). The strategic regulation of memory accuracy and informativeness. In A. S. Benjamin & B. H. Ross (Eds.), Skill and strategy in memory use (pp. 1–53). Amsterdam: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., Horgan, D. D., & Rakow, E. A. (2000). Test prediction and performance in a classroom context. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 160–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., & Bahbahani, K. (2008). Explaining calibration accuracy in classroom contexts: The effects of incentives, reflection, and explanatory style. Metacognition and Learning, 3, 101–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann-Biencourt, A., Lockl, K., Schneider, W., Ackerman, A., & Koriat, A. (2010). Self-paced study time as a cue for recall predictions across school age. British Journal of Development Psychology, 28, 767–784.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong, E., Peng, Y., & Rowell, L. L. (2009). Homework self-regulation: Gender, and achievement-level differences. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 269–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howie, P., & Roebers, C. M. (2007). Developmental progression in the confidence-accuracy relationship in event recall: Insights provided by a calibration perspective. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 871–893.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koriat, A. (1997). Monitoring one’s own knowledge during study: A cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 126, 349–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koriat, A. (2008). Subjective confidence in one’s answers: The consensuality principle. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 945–959.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koriat, K., & Goldsmith, M. (1996). Monitoring and control processes in the strategic regulation or memory accuracy. Psychological Review, 103, 490–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koriat, A., Ackerman, R., Lockl, K., & Schneider, W. (2009). The easily learned, easily remembered heursitic in children. Cognitive Development, 24, 169–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krebs, S., & Roebers, C. M. (2010). Children’s strategic regulation, metacognitive monitoring, and control processes during test taking. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 325–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockl, K., & Schneider, W. (2004). The effects of incentives and instructions on children’s allocation of study time. The European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 1, 153–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lovelace, E. A. (1984). Metamemory: Monitoring future recallability during study. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 10, 756–766.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maki, R. M., Shields, M., Wheeler, A. E., & Zacchilli, T. L. (2005). Individual differences in absolute and relative metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 723–731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melot, A.-M. (1998). The relationship between metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive experiences: Acquisition and re-elaboration. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 13, 75–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe, J., & Finn, B. (2008). Familiarity and retrieval processes in delayed judgments of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 1084–1097.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michel, E., Roebers, C. M., & Schneider, W. (2007). Educational films in the classroom: Increasing the benefit. Learning and Instruction, 17, 172–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 26, pp. 125–173). San Diego: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1994). Why investigate metacognition? In J. Metcalfe & A. P. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 1–25). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nietfeld, J. L., Cao, L., & Osboren, J. W. (2005). Metacognitive monitoring accuracy and student performance in the postsecondary classroom. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74, 7–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nietfeld, J. L., Enders, C. K., & Schraw, G. (2006a). A Monte Carlo comparison of measures of relative and absolute monitoring accuracy. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 258–271 [Journal; Peer Reviewed Journal].

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nietfeld, J. L., Cao, L., & Osboren, J. W. (2006b). The effect of distributed monitoring exercises and feedback on performance, monitoring accuracy, and self-efficacy. Metacognition Learning, 1, 159–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Normandeau, S., & Guay, F. (1998). Preschool behavior and first-grade school achievement: The mediational role of cognitive self-control. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 111–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ornstein, P. A., Haden, C. A., & Hedrick, A. M. (2004). Learning to remember: Social-communicative exchanges and the development of children’s memory skills. Developmental Review, 24, 374–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 385–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, M., & Kelley, C. (2005). Executive processes, memory accuracy, and memory monitoring: An aging and individual difference analysis. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 578–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roderer, T., & Roebers, C. M. (2009). Children’s strategic regulation of memory accuracy. In M. R. Kelley (Ed.), Applied memory. Hauppauge: Nova.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roebers, C. M. (2002). Confidence judgments in children’s and adult’s event recall and suggestibility. Developmental Psychology, 38, 1052–1067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roebers, C. M., Von der Linden, N., Schneider, W., & Howie, P. (2007). Children’s metamemorial judgments in an event recall task. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 97, 117–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roebers, C. M., Schmid, C., & Roderer, T. (2009). Metacognitive monitoring and control processes involved in primary school children’s test performance. British Journal of Development Psychology, 79, 749–767.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, W., & Lockl, K. (2008). Procedural metacognition in children: Evidence for developmental trends. In J. B. R. A. Dunlosky (Ed.), Handbook of metamemory and memory (pp. 391–409). New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, W., & Pressley, M. (Eds.). (1997). Memory development between two and twenty (2nd ed.). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, W., Visé, M., Lockl, K., & Nelson, T. O. (2000). Developmental trends in children’s memory monitoring evidence from a judgment-of-learning task. Cognitive Development, 15, 115–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G., Flowerday, T., & Lehman, S. (2001). Increasing situational interest in the classroom. Educational Psychology Review, 13, 211–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwenk, C., Bjorklund, D. F., & Schneider, W. (2009). Developmental and individual differences in young children’s use and maintenance of a selective strategy. Developmental Psychology, 45, 1034–1050.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shin, H. E., Bjorklund, B., & Beck, F. E. (2007). The adaptive nature of children’s overestimation in a stretegic memory task. Cognitive Development, 22, 197–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stankov, L., & Lee, J. (2008). Confidence and cognitive test performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 4, 961–976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Theodosiou, A., & Papaioannou, A. (2006). Motivational climate, achievement goals and metacognitive activity in physical education and exercise involvement in out-of-school settings. Psychology of sports and exercies, 7, 361–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M. C. M., & Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 66–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veenman, M. V. J., & Spaans, M. A. (2005). Relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills: Age and task differences. Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 159–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1, 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wigfield, A., Hoa, L. W., & Klauda, S. L. (2008). The role of achievement values in the regulation of achievement behaviors. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 169–195). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-regulation involves more than metacognition: A social cognitive perspective. Educational Psychologist, 30, 217–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The current study is financed by the Swiss National Science Foundation (Grant No. 100014_126559/1 to the second author). We are indebted to the principals, teachers, parents, children, and numerous undergraduates who participated in or supported our research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

    Saskia Susanne Krebs & Claudia Maria Roebers

Authors
  1. Saskia Susanne Krebs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Claudia Maria Roebers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saskia Susanne Krebs.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Krebs, S.S., Roebers, C.M. The impact of retrieval processes, age, general achievement level, and test scoring scheme for children’s metacognitive monitoring and controlling. Metacognition Learning 7, 75–90 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-011-9079-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-011-9079-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation