Perceived effort ratings are metacognitive judgments based on heuristic cue processing and prone to bias¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Ratings of experienced effort are a type of metacognitive judgment resulting from heuristic processing and therefore prone to biases, inferred from cues such as effort beliefs, prior task experience, fatigue, interest, and processing fluency. → Anique B. H. de Bruin 2023

Evidence¶

Anique B. H. de Bruin 2023¶

Anique B. H. de Bruin, Felicitas Biwer, Luotong Hui, Erdem Onan, Louise David, Wisnu Wiradhany. (2023). Worth the Effort: the Start and Stick to Desirable Difficulties (S2D2) Framework. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09766-w

q2 · i? · review · r2

Conceptual review claim, attributed to the recent review by Scheiter et al. (2020): self-reports of effort on Likert-type scales "should not be viewed as objective reflections of effort based solely on the difficulty of a task" but are inferred from cues of varying validity.

"ratings of experienced effort are in fact a type of metacognitive judgment that result from heuristic processing and are therefore prone to biases"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Students tend to rely on non-diagnostic cues when judging their own performance, resulting in inaccurate judgments — a broader claim this one bears on
• Metacognitive evaluations of effort and performance, rather than objective performance, drive spontaneous offloading — related
• Creative performance weakly predicts metacognitive judgments, with perceived difficulty and task interest serving as additional cues — related
• Perceived difficulty and task interest in Task 1 indirectly inform expectancy beliefs for Task 2 — related
• Subjective effort ratings are affected by invalid cues and only weakly valid as cues to judged learning outcomes — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Perceived mental effort serves as a cue for monitoring judgments, which mediate the effort–outcome relation (David et al., 2024 meta-analysis) — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Students use invested mental effort as a cue when judging their learning, and self-rated mental effort is negatively related to judgments of learning — related