Judgment accuracy of comprehension did not depend on misconceptions or instructional method¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3
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.
q3 i? Neither the overall interaction nor the individual interactions between misconceptions and instructional method were significant for judgment accuracy of comprehension. → Anja Prinz-Weiß & Elisa Röhm 2025
Evidence¶
Anja Prinz-Weiß & Elisa Röhm 2025¶
Anja Prinz-Weiß & Elisa Röhm. (2025). To what extent can think sheets with or without reflection prompts support self-regulated learning from text? Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-025-09419-z
q3 · i? · causal · r2
Regression analysis on judgment accuracy of comprehension (bias, scored from -4.00 to +4.00) in the online experiment found "no significant overall interaction"; individual interactions and the think-sheet vs. reflection comparison were also not significant, and main effects were not significant.
"The analysis on judgment accuracy of comprehension showed that there was no significant overall interaction between number of misconceptions before studying and instructional method, ΔR2 = .02, F(2, 86) = 1.11, p = .335."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Adequacy of regulation decisions did not depend on misconceptions or instructional method
- In Studies 1a and 2, instructional visuals produced no significant difference in test performance or in test and explain relative metacomprehension accuracy
- Completing the think sheet more accurately was associated with higher comprehension, transfer, and regulation decision adequacy — related
- Students with more misconceptions before studying more strongly underestimated their transfer performance, regardless of instructional method — related
- Learners with more misconceptions made more overconfident comprehension predictions after a standard text with a misconception list, an association not seen with refutation texts or think sheets — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
no-effect-judgment-accuracy-comprehension |
title |
Judgment accuracy of comprehension did not depend on misconceptions or instructional method |
description |
Judgment accuracy of comprehension did not depend on misconceptions or instructional method |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2025 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-19 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — anja-prinz-weiß-elisa-röhm-2025 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.