监测问题解决准确性干预措施的元分析

IF 10.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Noortje Janssen, Ard W. Lazonder
{"title":"监测问题解决准确性干预措施的元分析","authors":"Noortje Janssen, Ard W. Lazonder","doi":"10.1007/s10648-024-09936-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Accurate monitoring of performance in problem-solving tasks is an important prerequisite for students’ future academic success. A wide variety of interventions aiming to enhance students’ monitoring accuracy have been developed, but their effectiveness is not apparent from the individual studies in which they have been examined. This meta-analysis classified these interventions in terms of how they target students’ monitoring and investigated their relative effectiveness to improve monitoring accuracy in problem-solving tasks. Findings across the 35 included studies indicated that all interventions combined have a small positive effect on students’ monitoring accuracy (<i>g</i> = 0.25). Intervention type moderated the findings. Interventions on the whole task, metacognitive knowledge, and external standards improved monitoring accuracy. On the other hand, interventions targeting the timing of metacognitive judgment negatively impacted monitoring accuracy and significantly differed from all other interventions. Exploratory moderator analyses of study features indicated that secondary school students benefited least from the interventions compared to primary school students and adults, laboratory studies showed larger effects than classroom studies, and interventions were more effective for retrospective confidence judgments than for judgments of learning. For educational practice, interventions targeting the whole task, metacognitive knowledge, and external standards are recommended, while reconsideration and possibly discontinuation of timing interventions is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48344,"journal":{"name":"Educational Psychology Review","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Meta-analysis of Interventions for Monitoring Accuracy in Problem Solving\",\"authors\":\"Noortje Janssen, Ard W. Lazonder\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10648-024-09936-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Accurate monitoring of performance in problem-solving tasks is an important prerequisite for students’ future academic success. A wide variety of interventions aiming to enhance students’ monitoring accuracy have been developed, but their effectiveness is not apparent from the individual studies in which they have been examined. This meta-analysis classified these interventions in terms of how they target students’ monitoring and investigated their relative effectiveness to improve monitoring accuracy in problem-solving tasks. Findings across the 35 included studies indicated that all interventions combined have a small positive effect on students’ monitoring accuracy (<i>g</i> = 0.25). Intervention type moderated the findings. Interventions on the whole task, metacognitive knowledge, and external standards improved monitoring accuracy. On the other hand, interventions targeting the timing of metacognitive judgment negatively impacted monitoring accuracy and significantly differed from all other interventions. Exploratory moderator analyses of study features indicated that secondary school students benefited least from the interventions compared to primary school students and adults, laboratory studies showed larger effects than classroom studies, and interventions were more effective for retrospective confidence judgments than for judgments of learning. For educational practice, interventions targeting the whole task, metacognitive knowledge, and external standards are recommended, while reconsideration and possibly discontinuation of timing interventions is needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48344,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Psychology Review\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":10.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09936-4\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09936-4","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

准确监控学生在解决问题任务中的表现是学生未来学业成功的重要前提。旨在提高学生监控准确性的干预措施种类繁多,但从对这些干预措施的单项研究来看,其有效性并不明显。本荟萃分析根据这些干预措施如何针对学生的监控进行了分类,并调查了它们在提高问题解决任务中的监控准确性方面的相对有效性。35 项纳入研究的结果表明,所有干预措施加在一起对学生的监控准确性有微小的积极影响(g = 0.25)。干预类型调节了研究结果。对整个任务、元认知知识和外部标准的干预提高了监控的准确性。另一方面,针对元认知判断时机的干预对监控准确性产生了负面影响,并且与所有其他干预有显著差异。对研究特点的探索性调节分析表明,与小学生和成人相比,中学生从干预中获益最少,实验室研究比课堂研究显示出更大的效果,干预对回顾性自信判断比对学习判断更有效。在教育实践中,建议采取针对整个任务、元认知知识和外部标准的干预措施,同时需要重新考虑并在可能的情况下停止定时干预。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Meta-analysis of Interventions for Monitoring Accuracy in Problem Solving

Meta-analysis of Interventions for Monitoring Accuracy in Problem Solving

Accurate monitoring of performance in problem-solving tasks is an important prerequisite for students’ future academic success. A wide variety of interventions aiming to enhance students’ monitoring accuracy have been developed, but their effectiveness is not apparent from the individual studies in which they have been examined. This meta-analysis classified these interventions in terms of how they target students’ monitoring and investigated their relative effectiveness to improve monitoring accuracy in problem-solving tasks. Findings across the 35 included studies indicated that all interventions combined have a small positive effect on students’ monitoring accuracy (g = 0.25). Intervention type moderated the findings. Interventions on the whole task, metacognitive knowledge, and external standards improved monitoring accuracy. On the other hand, interventions targeting the timing of metacognitive judgment negatively impacted monitoring accuracy and significantly differed from all other interventions. Exploratory moderator analyses of study features indicated that secondary school students benefited least from the interventions compared to primary school students and adults, laboratory studies showed larger effects than classroom studies, and interventions were more effective for retrospective confidence judgments than for judgments of learning. For educational practice, interventions targeting the whole task, metacognitive knowledge, and external standards are recommended, while reconsideration and possibly discontinuation of timing interventions is needed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Psychology Review
Educational Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
15.70
自引率
3.00%
发文量
62
期刊介绍: Educational Psychology Review aims to disseminate knowledge and promote dialogue within the field of educational psychology. It serves as a platform for the publication of various types of articles, including peer-reviewed integrative reviews, special thematic issues, reflections on previous research or new research directions, interviews, and research-based advice for practitioners. The journal caters to a diverse readership, ranging from generalists in educational psychology to experts in specific areas of the discipline. The content offers a comprehensive coverage of topics and provides in-depth information to meet the needs of both specialized researchers and practitioners.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信