Claims

Perceived difficulty and task interest in Task 1 indirectly inform expectancy beliefs for Task 2

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · 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.

q2 i? Both perceived difficulty (negatively) and interest (positively) in Task 1 served as indirect cues for expectancy before Task 2. → Kamila Urban 2025

Evidence

Kamila Urban 2025

Kamila Urban, Marek Urban. (2025). Metacognition and motivation in creativity: examining the roles of self-efficacy and values as cues for metacognitive judgments. Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-025-09421-5

q2 · i? · associational · r2

The two-wave SEM of 360 university students supported the hypothesis that "H3c was supported for both perceived difficulty" and interest, meaning these metacognitive experiences informed not only judgments but also subsequent expectancy beliefs.

"The results suggested that H3c was supported for both perceived difficulty (β = − 0.06, p =.005) and interest (β = 0.09, p <.001)."

Discussion

Learner Variables

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id difficulty-interest-cues-subsequent-expectancy
title Perceived difficulty and task interest in Task 1 indirectly inform expectancy beliefs for Task 2
description Perceived difficulty and task interest in Task 1 indirectly inform expectancy beliefs for Task 2
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2025
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-18
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — kamila-urban-2025

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