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。

IF 5.1 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Psychological Science Pub Date : 2025-09-01 Epub Date: 2025-08-22 DOI:10.1177/09567976251358838
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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

有效的学习不仅包括快速获取知识和技能的能力,还包括准确监控学习进度的能力。本研究探讨了学习能力与监测准确度之间的关系。一项与直觉相反的荟萃分析(研究1,N = 2406)发现,学习能力出众的个体表现出稍差的监测准确性(以学习判断的分辨率衡量)。研究2重新分析了元分析数据,发现专家级学习者记住了更多他们错误地认为自己不会记住的项目,而专家级学习者的这种不自信导致了学习能力与监测准确性之间的负相关。研究3 (N = 102, 18-23岁的成年人)和研究4 (N = 481, 18-59岁的成年人)在对照实验中从概念上重复了研究1和2的发现。这些发现挑战了“好的学习者也是好的监督者”的传统观点,表明专家级的学习者实际上是有监督缺陷的人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.

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
Psychological Science
Psychological Science PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
13.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
156
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.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信