Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Metacognitive calibration—an extended conceptualization and potential applications

  • Published:
Metacognition and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this theoretical paper, I present a short critical review of research on calibration. Based on this conceptual analysis I argue for two extensions of this construct: In addition to traditional applications, the methodology should be transferred to also measure calibration between students’ metacognitive control processes (traditionally, only students’ metacognitive judgments were considered) and important external criteria (traditionally, judgments were only compared to students’ own performance). As an illustrative example, one application context will be highlighted where these proposed extensions would alleviate potential problems with the traditional conceptualization: While students’ idiosyncratic task definitions constitute unwanted error variance in the traditional account it would be possible to investigate them as a primary research question within this extended notion. More specifically, it would be possible to investigate how well students’ learning processes match objective task demands. I will put forward theoretical and empirical arguments in favor of these suggestions.

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
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allwood, C. M., Jonsson, A.-C., & Granhag, P. A. (2005). The effects of source and type of feedback on child witnesses’ metamemory accuracy. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 331–344. doi:10.1002/acp.1071.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, G., & Beal, C. R. (1995). Children’s recognition of inconsistencies in science texts: Multiple measures of comprehension monitoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 261–272. doi:10.1002/acp.2350090307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., et al. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing. A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Artelt, C. (2000). Wie prädiktiv sind retrospektive Selbstberichte über den Gebrauch von Lernstrategien für strategisches Lernen. Zeitschrift fur Padagogische Psychologie, 14(2/3), 72–84 How predictive are retrospective self-reports about the use of learning strategies. doi:10.1024//1010-0652.14.23.72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, L. (1984a). Spontaneous versus instructed use of multiple standards for evaluating comprehension: Effects of age, reading proficiency, and type of standard. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 38, 289–311. doi:10.1016/0022-0965(84)90127-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, L. (1984b). Children’s effective use of multiple standards for evaluating their comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 588–597. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.76.4.588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, L. (1985a). Differences in the standards used by college students to evaluate their comprehension of expository prose. Reading Research Quarterly, 20(3), 297–313. doi:10.2307/748020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, L. (1985b). How do we know when we don’t understand? Standards for evaluating text comprehension. In D. L. Forrest-Pressley, G. E. MacKinnon, & T. G. Waller (Eds.), Metacognition, cognition, and human performance (pp. 155–205). Orlando: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bannert, M. (2003). Assessment of metacognitive skills by means of thinking-aloud instruction and reflection prompts. Does the method affect the learning performance? Paper presented at the Biannual conference of the European Association of Research in Learning and Instruction (EARLI), Padua, Italy.

  • Barnett, J. E., & Hixon, J. E. (1997). Effects of grade level and subject on student test score predictions. The Journal of Educational Research, 90(3), 170–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beal, C. R. (1996). The role of comprehension monitoring in children’s revisions. Educational Psychology Review, 8(3), 219–238. doi:10.1007/BF01464074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook I: cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bol, L., Hacker, D. J., O’Shea, P., & Allen, D. (2005). The influence of overt practice, achievement level, and explanatory style on calibration accuracy and performance. Journal of Experimental Education, 73(4), 269–290. doi:10.3200/JEXE.73.4.269-290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broekkamp, H., van den Bergh, H., van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., & Rijlaardam, G. (2002a). Will that be on the test? Perceived task demands and test performance in a classroom context. European Journal of Psychology of Education, XVII(1), 75–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broekkamp, H., van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., Rijlaardam, G., & van den Bergh, H. (2002b). Importance in instructional text: teachers’ and students’ perception of task demands. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 260–271. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broekkamp, H., van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., van den Bergh, H., & Rijlaardam, G. (2004). Teachers’ task demands, students’ test expectations, and actual test content. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 205–220. doi:10.1348/000709904773839842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burson, K. A., Klayman, J., & Larrick, R. P. (2006). Skilled or unskilled, but still unaware of it: How perception of difficulty drive miscalibration in relative comparisons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(1), 60–77. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.1.60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 245–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. (1990). Principles of self-regulation: Action and emotion. In E. T. Higgins, & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (vol. 2). New York, NY: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dougherty, M. R., & Sprenger, A. (2006). The influence of imporper sets of information on judgment: How irrelevant information can bias judged probability. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 135(2), 262–281. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.135.2.262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky, J., & Hertzog, C. (2000). Updating knowledge about encoding strategies: A componential analysis of learning about strategy effectiveness from task experience. Psychology and Aging, 15(3), 462–474. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.15.3.462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, D., Johnson, K., Ehrlinger, J., & Kruger, J. (2003). Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12(3), 83–87. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.01235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87(3), 215–251. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.87.3.215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitts, P. M. (1964). Perceptual-motor skill learning. In A. W. Melton (Ed.), Categories of human learning (pp. 243–385). New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, J. T., White, C. B., & Gruppen, L. D. (2003). A longitudinal study of self-assessment accuracy. Medical Education, 37, 645–649. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2923.2003.01567.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garavalia, L. S., & Gredler, M. E. (2003). An exploratory study of academic goal setting, achievement calibration and self-regulated learning. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 29(4), 221–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • García-Arista, E., Campanario, J. M., & Otero, J. (1996). Influences of subject matter setting on comprehension monitoring. European Journal of Psychology of Education, XI(4), 427–441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garner, R. (1980). Monitoring of understanding: An investigation of good and poor readers’ awareness of induced miscomprehension of text. Journal of Reading Behavior, XII(1), 55–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gasser, M., & Tan, R. (2005). Performance estimates and confidence calibration for a perceptual-motor task. North American Journal of Psychology, 7(3), 457–468.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glenberg, A. M., & Epstein, W. (1985). Calibration of comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11(4), 702–718. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.11.1-4.702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glenberg, A. M., & Epstein, W. (1987). Inexpert calibration of comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 15(1), 84–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glenberg, A. M., Sanocki, T., Epstein, W., & Morris, C. (1987). Enhancing calibration of comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 116(2), 119–136. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.116.2.119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, L. A., & Kruskal, W. (1954). Measures of association for cross classifications. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 49, 732–769. doi:10.2307/2281536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hacker, D. J. (1997). Comprehension monitoring of written discourse across early-to-middle adolescence. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 9, 207–240. doi:10.1023/A:1007989901667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hacker, D. J. (1998). Self-regulated comprehension during normal reading. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 165–191). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    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(1), 160–170. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.92.1.160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadwin, A. F., Oshige, M., Fior, M. N., Tupper, K., & Miller, M. F. W. (2008). Examining the agreement between students and instructor task perceptions in a complex engineering design task. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), New York.

  • Hadwin, A. F., Winne, P. H., Stockley, D. B., Nesbit, J. C., & Woszczyna, C. (2001). Context moderates students’ self-reports about how they study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 477–487. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.93.3.477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hare, V. C., & Borchardt, K. M. (1985). Good and poor comprehenders’ detection of errors revisited. The Journal of Educational Research, 78(4), 237–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasselhorn, M. (1998). Metakognition [Metacognition]. In D. E. Rost (Ed.), Handwörterbuch der Pädagogischen Psychologie (pp. 348–351). Weinheim: Beltz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 88–140.

    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. doi:10.1002/acp.1302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jamieson-Noel, D., & Winne, P. H. (2003). Comparing self-reports to traces of studying behavior as representations of students’ studying and achievement. Zeitschrift fur Padagogische Psychologie, 17(3/4), 159–171. doi:10.1024//1010-0652.17.34.159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonsson, A.-C., & Allwood, C. M. (2003). Stability and variability in the realism of confidence judgments over time, content domain, and gender. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 559–574. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00028-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanfer, R., & Ackerman, P. L. (1989). Motivation and cognitive abilities: An integrative/aptitude-treatment interaction approach to skill acquisition. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(4), 657–690. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.74.4.657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koriat, A., & Levy-Sardot, R. (1999). Processes underlying metacognitive judgments: Information-based and experience-based monitoring of one’s own knowledge. In S. Chaiken, & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 483–502). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kröner, S., & Biermann, A. (2007). The relationship between confidence and self-concept—Towards a model of response confidence. Intelligence, 35(6), 580–590. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2006.09.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121–1134. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, L.-M., & Zabrucky, K. (1998). Calibration of comprehension: Research and implications for education and instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 345–391. doi:10.1006/ceps.1998.0972.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lodewyk, K. R., & Winne, P. H. (2005). Relations among the structure of learning tasks, achievement, and changes in self-efficacy in secondary students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(1), 3–12. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.97.1.3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luwel, K., Verschaffel, L., Onghena, P., & De Corte, E. (2003). Analysing the adaptiveness of strategy choices using the choice/no-choice method: The case of numerosity judgments. The European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 15(4), 511–537. doi:10.1080/09541440244000292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maki, R. H. (1998). Test predictions over text material. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in theory and practice (pp. 117–144). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maki, R. H., & McGuire, M. J. (2002). Metacognition for text: Findings and implications for education. In T. J. Perfect, & B. L. Schwartz (Eds.), Applied metacognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maki, R. H., Shields, M., Wheeler, A. E., & Zacchilli, T. L. (2005). Individual differences in absolute and relative metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(4), 723–731. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.97.4.723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maki, R. H., & Serra, M. (1992). Role of practice tests in the accuracy of test predictions on text material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(2), 200–217. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.84.2.200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D., Lin-Agler, L. M., & Zabrucky, K. (2005). A source of metacomprehension inaccuracy. Reading Psychology, 26(3), 251–265. doi:10.1080/02702710590962578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. O. (1984). A comparison of current measures of the accuracy of feeling-of-knowing predictions. Psychological Bulletin, 95(1), 109–133. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.95.1.109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. O. (1996). Gamma is a measure of the accuracy of predicting performance on one item relative to another item, not of the absolute performance on an individual item. Comments on Schraw (1995). Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 257–260. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199606)10:3<257::AID-ACP400>3.0.CO;2-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. O. (1999). Cognition versus metacognition. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The nature of cognition (pp. 625–641). Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. O., & Dunlosky, J. (1991). When people’s judgments of learning (JOLs) are extremely accurate at predicting subsequent recall: The “delayed-JOL effect”. Psychological Science, 2(4), 267–270. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1991.tb00147.x.

    Article  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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nietfeld, J., Cao, L., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Metacognitive monitoring accuracy and student performance in the postsecondary classroom. Journal of Experimental Education, 74(1), 7–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nietfeld, J. L., Enders, C. K., & Schraw, G. (2006). A Monte Carlo comparison of measures of relative and absolute monitoring accuracy. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(2), 258–271. doi:10.1177/0013164404273945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nietfeld, J., & Schraw, G. (2002). The effect of knowledge and strategy training on monitoring accuracy. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(3), 131–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otero, J., & Campanario, J. M. (1992). The relationship between academic achievement and metacognitive comprehension monitoring ability of Spanish secondary school students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 419–430. doi:10.1177/0013164492052002017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pallier, G. (2003). Gender differences in the self-assessment of accuracy on cognitive tasks. Sex Roles, 48(5/6), 265–276. doi:10.1023/A:1022877405718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pallier, G., Wilkinson, R., Danthiir, V., Kleitman, S., Knezevic, G., Stankov, L., et al. (2002). The role of individual differences in the accuracy of confidence judgments. The Journal of General Psychology, 129(3), 257–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 385–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plumb, C., Butterfield, E. C., Hacker, D. J., & Dunlosky, J. (1994). Error correction in text. Reading and Writing, 6(4), 347–360. doi:10.1007/BF01028848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pressley, M., & Ghatala, E. S. (1988). Delusions about performance on multiple-choice comprehension tests. Reading Research Quarterly, 24(4), 454–464. doi:10.2307/747643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawson, K. A., & Dunlosky, J. (2002). Are performance predictions for text based on ease of processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28(1), 69–80. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.28.1.69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G. (1995). Measures of feeling-of-knowing accuracy: A new look at an old problem. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 321–332. doi:10.1002/acp.2350090405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G., & Roedel, T. D. (1994). Test difficulty and judgment bias. Memory & Cognition, 22(1), 63–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunn, C. D., Lovett, M. C., & Reder, L. (2001). Awareness and working memory in strategy adaptivity. Memory & Cognition, 29(2), 254–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Son, L. K., & Schwartz, B. L. (2002). The relation between metacognitive monitoring and control. In T. J. Perfect, & B. L. Schwartz (Eds.), Applied metacognition (pp. 15–38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, E., Pieschl, S., & Bromme, R. (2006). Task complexity, epistemological beliefs and metacognitive calibration: An exploratory study. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(4), 319–338. doi:10.2190/1266-0413-387K-7J51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J. (1998). Metacognition, abilities, and developing expertise: What makes an expert student. Instructional Science, 26, 127–140. doi:10.1023/A:1003096215103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, N. J. (2000). Exploring the relationship between calibration and self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 12(4), 437–475. doi:10.1023/A:1009084430926.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veenman, M. V. J. (2003). The assessment of metacognitive skills: What can be learned from multi-method designs? Paper presented at the Biannual Conference of the European Association of Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI), Padua, Italy.

  • Veenman, M. J., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1(1), 3–14. doi:10.1007/s11409-006-6893-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walczyk, J. J., & Hall, V. C. (1989). Is the failure to monitor comprehension an instance of cognitive impulsivity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 294–298. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weingardt, K. R., Leonesio, R. J., & Loftus, E. F. (1994). Viewing eyewitness research from a metacognitive perspective. In J. Metcalfe, & A. P. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition, knowing about knowing (pp. 157–184). Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, J., Griffin, T. D., & Thiede, K. W. (2005). Putting the comprehension in metacomprehension. The Journal of General Psychology, 132(4), 408–428. doi:10.3200/GENP.132.4.408-428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. H. (1995). Inherent details in self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 30(4), 173–187. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3004_2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. H. (1996). A metacognitive view of individual differences in self-regulated learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 8(4), 327–353. doi:10.1016/S1041-6080(96)90022-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. H. (1997). Experimenting to bootstrap self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 397–410. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.89.3.397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. H. (2005). Key issues in modeling and applying research on self-regulated learning. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54(2), 232–238. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2005.00206.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. H. (2006). How software technologies can improve research on learning and bolster school reform. Educational Psychologist, 41(1), 5–17. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4101_3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277–304). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. H., & Jamieson-Noel, D. (2002). Exploring students’ calibration of self reports about study tactics and achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(4), 551–572. doi:10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00006-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. H., & Jamieson-Noel, D. (2003). Self-regulating studying by objectives for learning: Students’ reports compared to a model. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 259–276. doi:10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00041-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winne, P. H., & Muis, K. R. (2004). Statistical estimates of learner’s judgments about knowledge in calibration of achievement. Unpublished manuscript, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada.

  • Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation (pp. 531–566). San Diego: Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Winograd, P., & Johnston, P. (1982). Comprehension monitoring and the error detection paradigm. Journal of Reading Behavior, XIV(1), 61–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zabrucky, K., & Moore, D. (1989). Children’s ability to use three standards to evaluate their comprehension of text. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 336–352. doi:10.2307/747773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, Q., & Linderholm, T. (2008). Adult metacomprehension: Judgment processes and accuracy constraints. Educational Psychology Review, 20, 191–206. doi:10.1007/s10648-008-9073-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 329–339. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper was supported by a grant from the German Research Foundation (DFG) and is based on a chapter of my dissertation which I also presented at AERA 2008, New York. I especially thank the audience of that conference and Prof. Rainer Bromme for helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Psychological Department, University of Muenster, Fliednerstr. 21, 48149, Muenster, Germany

    Stephanie Pieschl

Authors
  1. Stephanie Pieschl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephanie Pieschl.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pieschl, S. Metacognitive calibration—an extended conceptualization and potential applications. Metacognition Learning 4, 3–31 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-9030-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-008-9030-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation