Informing learners about the to-be-monitored cue before the problem-solving phase improves self-assessment accuracy compared with informing them only afterwards¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3·i1small
Currency · newest study 2024 · checked against its sources 2026-10-21 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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 i1 In Experiment 1, a significant main effect of timing of cue prompt favored informing learners about the cue before problem-solving over informing them only after, with printed effect size ηp2 = 0.03. → Waldeyer 2024
Evidence¶
Waldeyer 2024¶
Waldeyer, J., Endres, T., Roelle, J., Baars, M., & Renkl, A. (2024). How to Optimize Self-Assessment Accuracy in Cognitive Skill Acquisition When Learning from Worked Examples. Educational Psychology Review, 36, 103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09944-4
q3 · i1 · causal · r2
Experiment 1, 2 × 2 ANOVA (N = 129) on absolute accuracy. The main effect of timing of cue prompt was significant, F(1, 125) = 4.09, p = 0.046, with printed effect size ηp2 = 0.03; learners "informed about the to-be-monitored cue already before the problem-solving phase showed better self-assessment accuracy".
"the 2 × 2 ANOVA revealed that the groups that were informed about the to-be-monitored cue already before the problem-solving phase showed better self-assessment accuracy, F(1, 125) = 4.09, p = 0.046, ηp2 = 0.03."
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Metacognition — outcome: instruction changes it
- Self-Regulation — outcome: instruction changes it
Related Claims¶
- Informing learners about the to-be-monitored cue before problem-solving did not affect mental effort or problem-solving performance (Experiment 1) — related
- Prompted cue type and timing of cue prompt do not interact in their effect on self-assessment accuracy (Experiment 1) — related
- Prompting learners to infer self-assessments from performance-based cues yields better self-assessment accuracy than prompting explanation-based cues in the initial problem-solving phase — related
- Effortful generative learning activities during problem-solving example study provide cues that improve students' item-level self-monitoring accuracy — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
inform-learners-before-problem-solving-improves-accuracy |
title |
Informing learners about the to-be-monitored cue before the problem-solving phase improves self-assessment accuracy compared with informing them only afterwards |
description |
Informing learners about the to-be-monitored cue before the problem-solving phase improves self-assessment accuracy compared with informing them only afterwards |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2024 |
source_checked |
2026-10-21 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-21 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — waldeyer-2024 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.