Debriefing analysis and application phases operate as distributed metacognition on the publicly shared account¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · qualitative r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Thinking about thinking in the analysis and application phases emerges through interaction, moving between participants as they identify and evaluate performance gaps. → Mads Solberg 2025

Evidence¶

Mads Solberg 2025¶

Mads Solberg, Charlott Sellberg. (2025). Debriefing as epistemic engineering: conversational remembering and socially distributed metacognition in healthcare simulation. Instructional Science (2026) 54:7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-025-09760-5

q2 · i? · qualitative · r3

Cognitive-ethnographic excerpt analysis of the analysis phase, in which an observer comments on peers' NEWS-scorecard use and the facilitator propagates the evaluation back to the performing students, who publicly confirm the gap and articulate its clinical significance.

"Excerpt 3 offers an example of the socially distributed nature of metacognitive work. Rather than being an individual performance, the facilitator activates the observer (student C), asking for his external perspective, identifying a critical gap and its rationale"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Debriefing description phase enacts conversational remembering that turns private recollections into a public, shared epistemic artifact — related
• Facilitator techniques such as advocacy-inquiry, guided self-correction, and the plus-delta method function as metacognitive practices that shift focus from retrodiction to prediction — related
• The facilitator builds the shared account by shifting between narrator, mentor, and monitor roles and consolidating group consensus — related
• Leadership moves are distributed among members of children's collaborative learning groups rather than concentrated in a single leader — related