Monitoring judgment timing moderates the correlation: concurrent judgments show a stronger negative association than prospective judgments¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2020 · 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? Concurrent monitoring judgments correlate more negatively with effort than prospective judgments. → Martine Baars & Lisette Wijnia & Anique de Bruin & Fred Paas 2020
Evidence¶
Martine Baars & Lisette Wijnia & Anique de Bruin & Fred Paas 2020¶
Martine Baars & Lisette Wijnia & Anique de Bruin & Fred Paas. (2020). The Relation Between Students' Effort and Monitoring Judgments During Learning: A Meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09569-3
q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2
Timing moderator analysis (Table 1: concurrent k = 39, r = −.492; prospective k = 84, r = −.281) was significant, Q(1) = 16.71, p < .001, and prospective judgments remained a significant predictor in the meta-regression (b = .171, p = .023).
"We further made a distinction between the timing of the judgment and found that concurrent judgments resulted in a higher negative correlation than prospective judgments."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- In the multivariate meta-regression, goal-driven manipulation, judgment timing, and task type remain significant moderators — related
- Effort appraisals correlate negatively with monitoring judgments: high mental effort is associated with poorer performance judgments — a broader claim this one bears on
- Effort and monitoring judgments show a medium negative correlation (r = −.355) during learning — a broader claim this one bears on
- Task type moderates the correlation: problem-solving tasks show a stronger negative association than word/paired-associate tasks — related
- Effort-rating item wording changes what learners reflect on: requirement wording correlates negatively and engagement wording positively with judgments of learning — related
- Goal-driven manipulations weaken the negative effort–monitoring correlation, which is nonsignificant under incentives, time pressure or self-agency ratings taken singly — related
- Effort ratings correlate negatively with judgments of learning (r = −0.355), but the correlation disappears under a goal-driven interpretation of effort — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
concurrent-stronger-than-prospective-judgments |
title |
Monitoring judgment timing moderates the correlation: concurrent judgments show a stronger negative association than prospective judgments |
description |
Monitoring judgment timing moderates the correlation: concurrent judgments show a stronger negative association than prospective judgments |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2020 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-19 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — martine-baars-lisette-wijnia-anique-de-bruin-fred-paas-2020 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.