Technology-supported educational interventions are associated with higher metacognitive outcomes on average (g = 0.653), with substantial between-study heterogeneity¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesis r3 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2026 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 Across 33 studies and 94 effect sizes, technology-supported interventions showed a positive pooled association with metacognitive outcomes, g = 0.653, 95% CI [0.520, 0.786]. → Yijia Yuan & Yiran Du 2026 q3 i? Heterogeneity was substantial (I² = 72.7%, attributed to between-study variance), and the prediction interval [−0.02, 1.32] indicates effects in comparable implementations could range from negligible to large. → Yijia Yuan & Yiran Du 2026 (2)

Evidence¶

Yijia Yuan & Yiran Du 2026¶

Yijia Yuan & Yiran Du. (2026). Technology-Supported Interventions and Learners' Metacognition: A Three-Level Meta-Analysis. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10227-3

q3 · i2 · quant-synthesis · r3

Three-level random-effects meta-analysis of 33 studies contributing 94 effect sizes from randomised and quasi-experimental intervention studies in formal K–12 and post-secondary settings; the pooled estimate was "g = 0.653, 95% CI [0.520, 0.786]".

"The three-level model estimated a positive pooled association between technology-supported interventions and metacognitive outcomes, g = 0.653, 95% CI [0.520, 0.786], t(32) = 9.98, p <.001."

Yijia Yuan & Yiran Du 2026 (2)¶

Yijia Yuan & Yiran Du. (2026). Technology-Supported Interventions and Learners' Metacognition: A Three-Level Meta-Analysis. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10227-3

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3

Heterogeneity analysis within the same three-level model: "total I² = 72.7%", with between-study variance σ²₃ = 0.104 and a 95% prediction interval of approximately [−0.02, 1.32]; the authors state the pooled estimate is an average across substantively heterogeneous studies.

"Statistical heterogeneity was substantial, Q(93) = 298.06, p <.001, with total I² = 72.7%."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The pooled association is robust to dependence, baseline-adjustment, risk-of-bias, and effect-size-derivation sensitivity analyses — related
• Emerging technologies show a small-to-moderate positive overall effect on TEFL outcomes (g = 0.38, corrected to 0.28 for publication bias) — related
• The evidence base is concentrated in self-reported metacognitive regulation, with planning support and non-self-report measures under-represented — related
• Effects of AI literacy interventions vary considerably across contexts, with most variance between studies (71.361%) and a wide prediction interval — related
• Technology effects on TEFL outcomes trend upward across educational levels (primary g = 0.29, secondary g = 0.35, tertiary g = 0.44), though between-level differences are not statistically significant — related
• Effect sizes vary widely between studies and especially between comparisons within studies — related
• Effect sizes across included studies show high heterogeneity (all I² above 75%) — related