In this sample the best-performing university students calibrated slightly worse than the lowest-performing students, so no unskilled-and-unaware effect was supported¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · 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? Pairwise comparisons showed the 25% best performing students had higher miscalibration (M = 1.70, SD = 0.80) than the 25% lowest performing students (M = 0.79, SD = 0.54), p < .001. → Marloes L. Nederhand 2021
Evidence¶
Marloes L. Nederhand 2021¶
Marloes L. Nederhand, Huib K. Tabbers, Anique B.H. De Bruin, Remy M. J. P. Rikers. (2021). Metacognitive awareness as measured by second-order judgements among university and secondary school students. Metacognition and Learning, 16, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09228-6
q3 · i? · associational · r2
Descriptive and pairwise comparison of calibration accuracy across performance quartiles among the 251 university students on the educational psychology exam. The top quartile was significantly less well calibrated than the bottom quartile; the article reports means and a p-value, no effect size.
"pairwise comparisons even show that the 25% best performing students calibrate slightly worse ( M = 1.70, SD = 0.80) than the 25% lowest performing students ( M = 0.79, SD = 0.54 ), p < .001."
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Metacognition — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes
Related Claims¶
- Prior Knowledge Needed For Accurate Self Assessment — a broader claim this one bears on
- Before self-scoring, high-performing primary students make more accurate monitoring judgments of math problem performance than low-performing students (unskilled-and-unaware effect) — related
- Before self-scoring, the unskilled-and-unaware effect in regulation accuracy appears on multiplication but not on division tasks — related
- After self-scoring, the monitoring-accuracy gap between low- and high-performing students remains on multiplication (small) but disappears on division — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
best-performers-calibrated-worse-no-unskilled-unaware |
title |
In this sample the best-performing university students calibrated slightly worse than the lowest-performing students, so no unskilled-and-unaware effect was supported |
description |
In this sample the best-performing university students calibrated slightly worse than the lowest-performing students, so no unskilled-and-unaware effect was supported |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2021 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-19 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — marloes-l-nederhand-2021 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.