Working memory capacity predicts monitoring accuracy after a single reading but not after rereading, independently of comprehension ability (Experiment 2)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2008 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Lower-WMC readers had poorer monitoring accuracy when reading once; rereading benefited them to the point where WMC no longer affected accuracy, and this effect was independent of comprehension ability. → Griffin 2008

Evidence¶

Griffin 2008¶

Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., & Thiede, K. W. (2008). Individual differences, rereading, and self-explanation: Concurrent processing and cue validity as constraints on metacomprehension accuracy. Memory & Cognition, 36(1), 93-103. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.36.1.93

q3 · i? · causal · r2

In Experiment 2, WMC was measured as a composite of reading span and operation span tasks. A stepwise regression (Table 3) retained a significant rereading × WMC term; the article notes the WMC × rereading beta increased only from .25 to .28 when comprehension ability was removed, showing independence.

"Likewise, WMC interacted with rereading, but not with self-explanation (see Figure 3). Lower WMC readers had poorer monitoring accuracy when reading once (R2 .21) but benefited from rereading to the extent that WMC no longer affected accuracy (R2 .01)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Reading comprehension ability predicts monitoring accuracy after a single reading but not after rereading (Experiments 1 and 2) — related
• Neither rereading nor self-explanation changed comprehension test performance itself; effects were specific to monitoring accuracy — related
• Rereading significantly improves metacomprehension monitoring accuracy relative to reading once (Experiment 1) — related
• A self-explanation instruction during rereading improves monitoring accuracy for all readers above mere rereading (Experiment 2) — related
• The context-learning effect did not significantly interact with reading comprehension ability, though the trend favored more able readers — related
• Five of seven situation-model interventions significantly improved relative metacomprehension accuracy, concept mapping only marginally (p = .097), and self-explaining not significantly — a broader claim this one bears on
• Offloading attenuates individual differences linked to unaided ability — related
• Students can only improve if they develop the capacity to monitor the quality of their own work during actual production — related
• For prediction judgments on factual questions, males and learners with lower WMC and lower topic knowledge, but higher self-perceived topic knowledge and self-perceived metacomprehension ability, showed stronger overestimation — related
• Working memory compensatorily moderates the explaining intervention's advantage: supported self-explaining benefits students with weaker working memory most — related