Self-report factors correlate weakly with metacognitive behavior while within-factor subcomponent correlations are larger, per studies reviewed for the meta-analysis¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesis r2–r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Correlations between self-report questionnaires and think aloud protocols are low, and retrospective task-specific questionnaires correlate somewhat better. → Craig 2020 q2 i? Correlations among metacognitive behavior subcomponents range from .64 to .98, while knowledge component correlations range from .02 to .80. → Craig 2020 (2)

Evidence¶

Craig 2020¶

Craig, K., Hale, D., Grainger, C., & Stewart, M. E. (2020). Evaluating metacognitive self-reports: systematic reviews of the value of self-report in metacognitive research. Metacognition and Learning, 15, 155-213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09222-y

q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3

The review reports, citing Van Hout-Wolters & Schellings (2009), that retrospective task-specific questionnaires correlate with think aloud protocols with r's ranging from .10 to .42; questionnaire-versus-think-aloud correlations were lower. These are second-hand correlations narrated by the review.

"Correlations between retrospective task specific questionnaires and think aloud protocols fare a little better in that the r’s range from .10 to .42 (V an Hout-Wolters & Schellings 2009)."

Craig 2020 (2)¶

Craig, K., Hale, D., Grainger, C., & Stewart, M. E. (2020). Evaluating metacognitive self-reports: systematic reviews of the value of self-report in metacognitive research. Metacognition and Learning, 15, 155-213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09222-y

q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

The review reports, citing Schellings (2011) and Van Hout-Wolters & Schellings (2009), that within-factor subcomponent correlations are larger: behavior components "range from .64 to .98" and knowledge components "range from .02 to .80." Second-hand correlations narrated by the review.

"Correlations of varying metacognitive behaviors (e.g. planning or monitoring) range from .64 to .98, and correlations of components of metacognitive knowledge (e.g. task or strategy knowledge) range from .02 to .80 (Schellings 2011; V an Hout-Wolters & Schellings2009)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Self-report subscales do not reliably assess distinct metacognitive subcomponents, with structures of two to nine components found across studies
• MAKQ dimensions correlate moderately with each other, with strategy knowledge only weakly related to the self-perception scales
• Self-report measures of metacognition support a two-factor structure separating metacognitive knowledge from metacognitive regulation — related
• A task-specific questionnaire built item-by-item from a think-aloud coding taxonomy correlated r=.51 with think-aloud protocols, higher than the -.07 to .42 regularly reported — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Low questionnaire–think-aloud correlations may have two alternative explanations besides poor self-report ability: the methods may measure different strategies or be aimed at different tasks — related
• When SRL is measured at a coarse grain size (global self-regulation), students are relatively well able to report on their strategy use — related
• Schellings' questionnaire-thinking-aloud convergent correlation of .51 rests on a small sample and is questionable against other studies — related
• At scale level, the questionnaire's Elaboration & evaluation scale correlated significantly with the same think-aloud scale (r=.60) while the Orientation & planning scale did not (r=.24) — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• In the case study, students answering the questionnaire while thinking aloud showed misunderstanding of items, general rather than task-specific reference perspectives, middle-category 'neutral' answering, and probable social desirability — related
• Think-aloud reports are incomplete and sometimes nonveridical, particularly for metacognitive processes — related
• Metacognitive awareness is weakly correlated with intelligence and independently predicts performance (review-reported) — related
• Prior knowledge and epistemic self-efficacy as an evaluator of knowledge are important themes in detecting and efficiently resolving conceptual discrepancies — related