Alert:

Limited Availability of Full-Text Documents. Click here for more information, or here to request the return of a PDF online.

EJ964388 - Overconfidence Produces Underachievement: Inaccurate Self Evaluations Undermine Students' Learning and Retention

Help

Tutorial

Help |

Tutorial

Help |

Tutorial

Help With This Page

Back to Search Results Help Permalink Share this record

More Info:
Help 0 items in My Clipboard | Add record to My Clipboard

Record Details

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text | More Info:
Help Find in a Library | Publisher's website

Related Items: Show Related Items

Click on any of the links below to perform a new search
ERIC #:	EJ964388
Title:	Overconfidence Produces Underachievement: Inaccurate Self Evaluations Undermine Students' Learning and Retention
Authors:	Dunlosky, John; Rawson, Katherine A.
Descriptors:	Definitions; Memory; Underachievement; Metacognition; Correlation; Learning Processes; College Students; Recall (Psychology); Tests; Cues; Individual Differences; Intervention; Self Evaluation (Individuals); Learning Theories
Source:	Learning and Instruction, v22 n4 p271-280 Aug 2012
More Info: Help Peer Reviewed:	Yes
Publisher:	Elsevier. 6277 Sea Harbor Drive, Orlando, FL 32887-4800. Tel: 877-839-7126; Tel: 407-345-4020; Fax: 407-363-1354; e-mail: usjcs@elsevier.com; Web site: http://www.elsevier.com
Publication Date:	2012-08-00
Pages:	10
Pub Types:	Journal Articles; Reports - Research
Abstract:	The function of accurately monitoring one's own learning is to support effective control of study that enhances learning. Although this link between monitoring accuracy and learning is intuitively plausible and is assumed by general theories of self-regulated learning, it has not received a great deal of empirical scrutiny and no study to date has examined the link between monitoring accuracy and longer-term retention. Across two studies, college students paced their study of key-term definitions (e.g., "Proactive interference: Information already stored in memory interferes with the learning of new information"). After all definitions were studied, participants completed practice cued recall tests (e.g., "What is proactive interference?") in which they attempted to type the correct definition for each term. After each test trial, participants judged how much of their response was correct. These study-test-judgment trials continued until a definition was judged as correct three times. A final cued recall test occurred two days later. In Study 1, judgment accuracy was manipulated experimentally, and in Study 2, individual differences in accuracy were examined. In both studies, greater accuracy was associated with higher levels of retention, and this link could not be explained by differential feedback, effort during study, or trials to criterion. Results indicate that many students could benefit from interventions aimed at improving their skill at judging their learning. (Contains 3 figures.)
Abstractor:	As Provided
Reference Count:	0

Note:	N/A
Identifiers:	N/A
Record Type:	Journal
Level:	N/A
Institutions:	N/A
Sponsors:	N/A
ISBN:	N/A
ISSN:	ISSN-0959-4752
Audiences:	N/A
Languages:	English
Education Level:	N/A
Direct Link:	http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.08.003

Back to Search Results