More complex (versus simple) math performance measures are associated with larger metacognition–math effect sizes¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q4
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q4 i? Studies using more complex (versus simple) math assessments showed larger pooled effect sizes for the metacognition–math association. → Gemma Muncer 2021

Evidence¶

Gemma Muncer 2021¶

Gemma Muncer, Philip A. Higham, Corentin J. Gosling, Samuele Cortese, Henry Wood-Downie, & Julie A. Hadwin. (2021). A Meta-Analysis Investigating the Association Between Metacognition and Math Performance in Adolescence. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09620-x

q4 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3

The moderation analysis compared pooled effect sizes for complex versus simple math assessments (e.g. multi-step word problems versus standardised computation scales) and found complex measures "was associated with larger effect sizes". No subgroup effect size is printed in the available text.

"Consideration of online (versus offline) measures of metacognition and more complex (versus simple) measures of math performance, and their combination, was associated with larger effect sizes; however, heterogeneity remained high for all analyses."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Heterogeneity between studies of the metacognition–math association is significant and remains high in all moderator analyses — related
• The combination of online metacognition measures with complex math assessments is associated with the largest effect sizes — related
• Metacognition is significantly positively correlated with math performance in adolescence (pooled r = .37) — related