In one 2×2 experiment with 120 undergraduates, an Assessment-Performance Calibration Activity (APCA) gave the most accurate self-assessment and least overconfidence, and adding a feedback-literacy script did not improve calibration further¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2026 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? The APCA group showed the lowest self-assessment error at T1 and T3, and the combined group did not consistently outperform the APCA-only group. → Dai 2026 q3 i? The APCA group had the lowest overconfidence rate (5.0%) versus higher rates in the other groups. → Dai 2026 (2)

Evidence¶

Dai 2026¶

Dai (2026). Rethinking AI-assisted writing instruction: feedback literacy scripts, calibration training, and student writing development. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1829268

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Self-assessment accuracy analysis in the 2×2 experiment using baseline-adjusted models controlling for T0 SAA, because the APCA group started with lower raw error. No effect size value is printed for this contrast.

"In particular, the APCA group showed the lowest error at both T1 and T3, whereas the combined group did not consistently outperform the APCA-only group."

Dai 2026 (2)¶

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Descriptive statistics across the four groups (Table 1) show the APCA group's lowest mean absolute error and overconfidence rate; the regular AI, FRAC, and combined groups showed higher error and overconfidence rates. Values are descriptive.

"The APCA group had the lowest mean absolute error (M = 2.25, SD = 1.87) and the lowest overconfidence rate (5.0%)."

Discussion¶

Self Assessment Accuracy Is Low Without Training — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
Self Assessment Improves Self Regulated Learning — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it
Prior Knowledge Needed For Accurate Self Assessment — a broader claim this one bears on
A theoretical article, citing two simulation studies, reports that novice clinical learners overestimated their performance and that their confidence exceeded their accuracy — related
Most preservice teachers were overconfident in the completeness of their fraction comparison explanations at both first draft and revision — related
Learners are substantially overconfident when evaluating the quality of their self-generated examples — related
SRSD instruction improved students' accuracy in self-evaluating their texts' quality, although overestimation persisted — related
Practice with feedback, regardless of feedback type, improves metacognitive calibration relative to lecture, reducing overconfidence by about 13 percentage points — related
The tribute reports students tend to overestimate their sport performance, and four-level model instruction may improve calibration accuracy — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
In AI-assisted writing, the combined FRAC+APCA intervention produced the highest writing quality gains, with FRAC alone exceeding APCA alone, across T1–T3 — related
FRAC and combined intervention advantages transferred to a new writing task and were retained after AI support was withdrawn — reports the opposite
Across both experiments, self-assessment feedback failed to improve self-assessment accuracy in the absence of feedback, and learners' self-assessments did not track practice-driven performance gains — reports the opposite
In Experiment 2, making metacognitive predictions alone did not improve calibration, performance feedback was sufficient, and explicit metacognitive feedback added no significant benefit — related
Students taught by teachers who received training outperformed those in the control condition, and adding the AIED-U system did not improve learning gains further beyond training alone — related

Page metadata

Field	Value
`type`	`claim`
`id`	`apca-improves-self-assessment-accuracy-overconfidence`
`title`	`In one 2×2 experiment with 120 undergraduates, an Assessment-Performance Calibration Activity (APCA) gave the most accurate self-assessment and least overconfidence, and adding a feedback-literacy script did not improve calibration further`
`description`	`In one 2×2 experiment with 120 undergraduates, an Assessment-Performance Calibration Activity (APCA) gave the most accurate self-assessment and least overconfidence, and adding a feedback-literacy script did not improve calibration further`
`status`	`review`
`evidence_strength`	`moderate`
`newest_evidence`	`2026`
`source_checked`	`2026-10-20`
`generated`	by `process:wiki-ingest` on `2026-10-11`
`trust`	unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
`sources`	2 — `dai-2026`, `dai-2026-2`

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.