Native and non-native speaking fourth graders do not differ in recognition or metacognitive monitoring resolution in a paired-associates task (Study 1)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In Study 1, a multivariate ANOVA showed no significant group differences between 30 native and 30 non-native speaking fourth graders in recognition, monitoring discrimination, or Gamma correlations in the paired-associates task. → Buehler 2021

Evidence¶

Buehler 2021¶

Buehler, F. J., van Loon, M. H., Bayard, N. S., Steiner, M., & Roebers, C. M. (2021). Comparing metacognitive monitoring between native and non-native speaking primary school students. Metacognition and Learning, 16, 749–768. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-021-09261-z

q3 · i? · associational · r2

Study 1 matched 30 native and 30 non-native speaking fourth graders by age and gender and assessed recognition and monitoring resolution in a Kanji paired-associates task. The MANOVA showed "did not show significant group differences between native and non-native speaking students" (F(3, 56) = 1.05; p = .38; η2p = 0.05).

"A multivariate ANOVA including recognition, monitoring discrimination scores, and Gamma correlations as dependent variables with use of Pillai’s trace did not show significant group differences between native and non-native speaking students, F(3, 56) = 1.05; p = .38; η2p = 0.05."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Metacognitive monitoring deficits are unlikely to be the primary source of academic performance differences between native and non-native speaking students — a broader claim this one bears on
• Study 2 replicates the absence of group differences in recognition and monitoring resolution in the paired-associates task — related
• Native and non-native speaking fourth graders do not differ in monitoring resolution of their open-ended text comprehension answers (Study 2) — related