Mengqi Hu, Wenbo Zhao, Anran Li, David R Shanks, Yadi Yu, Xiaofang Tian, Muyi Liu, Xiao Hu, Liang Luo, Chunliang Yang
{"title":"好的学习者是糟糕的监控者:学习能力与监控准确性的负相关关系。","authors":"Mengqi Hu, Wenbo Zhao, Anran Li, David R Shanks, Yadi Yu, Xiaofang Tian, Muyi Liu, Xiao Hu, Liang Luo, Chunliang Yang","doi":"10.1177/09567976251358838","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Effective learning involves not only the ability to quickly acquire knowledge and skills, but also the capacity to accurately monitor one's ongoing learning progress. The present research probed the relation between learning ability and monitoring accuracy. A meta-analysis (Study 1, <i>N</i> = 2,406) counterintuitively found that individuals with superior learning ability exhibited slightly poorer monitoring accuracy (measured as the resolution of judgments of learning). Study 2 reanalyzed the meta-analysis data and observed that expert learners remembered more items they erroneously believed they would not remember, and this underconfidence in expert learners led to a negative association between learning ability and monitoring accuracy. Studies 3 (<i>N</i> = 102, adults aged 18-23) and 4 (<i>N</i> = 481, adults aged 18-59) conceptually replicated the findings of Studies 1 and 2 in controlled experiments. These findings challenge the conventional wisdom that good learners are also good monitors, suggesting instead that expert learners are actually the ones with monitoring deficits.</p>","PeriodicalId":20745,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Science","volume":" ","pages":"746-764"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Good Learners Are Poor Monitors: A Negative Relation Between Learning Ability and Monitoring Accuracy.\",\"authors\":\"Mengqi Hu, Wenbo Zhao, Anran Li, David R Shanks, Yadi Yu, Xiaofang Tian, Muyi Liu, Xiao Hu, Liang Luo, Chunliang Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09567976251358838\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Effective learning involves not only the ability to quickly acquire knowledge and skills, but also the capacity to accurately monitor one's ongoing learning progress. The present research probed the relation between learning ability and monitoring accuracy. A meta-analysis (Study 1, <i>N</i> = 2,406) counterintuitively found that individuals with superior learning ability exhibited slightly poorer monitoring accuracy (measured as the resolution of judgments of learning). Study 2 reanalyzed the meta-analysis data and observed that expert learners remembered more items they erroneously believed they would not remember, and this underconfidence in expert learners led to a negative association between learning ability and monitoring accuracy. Studies 3 (<i>N</i> = 102, adults aged 18-23) and 4 (<i>N</i> = 481, adults aged 18-59) conceptually replicated the findings of Studies 1 and 2 in controlled experiments. These findings challenge the conventional wisdom that good learners are also good monitors, suggesting instead that expert learners are actually the ones with monitoring deficits.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20745,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological Science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"746-764\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976251358838\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/8/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976251358838","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/8/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Good Learners Are Poor Monitors: A Negative Relation Between Learning Ability and Monitoring Accuracy.
Effective learning involves not only the ability to quickly acquire knowledge and skills, but also the capacity to accurately monitor one's ongoing learning progress. The present research probed the relation between learning ability and monitoring accuracy. A meta-analysis (Study 1, N = 2,406) counterintuitively found that individuals with superior learning ability exhibited slightly poorer monitoring accuracy (measured as the resolution of judgments of learning). Study 2 reanalyzed the meta-analysis data and observed that expert learners remembered more items they erroneously believed they would not remember, and this underconfidence in expert learners led to a negative association between learning ability and monitoring accuracy. Studies 3 (N = 102, adults aged 18-23) and 4 (N = 481, adults aged 18-59) conceptually replicated the findings of Studies 1 and 2 in controlled experiments. These findings challenge the conventional wisdom that good learners are also good monitors, suggesting instead that expert learners are actually the ones with monitoring deficits.
期刊介绍:
Psychological Science, the flagship journal of The Association for Psychological Science (previously the American Psychological Society), is a leading publication in the field with a citation ranking/impact factor among the top ten worldwide. It publishes authoritative articles covering various domains of psychological science, including brain and behavior, clinical science, cognition, learning and memory, social psychology, and developmental psychology. In addition to full-length articles, the journal features summaries of new research developments and discussions on psychological issues in government and public affairs. "Psychological Science" is published twelve times annually.