Why Do Delayed Summaries Improve Metacomprehension Accuracy?

Mary C.M. Anderson, Keith W. Thiede

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

74 Scopus citations

Abstract

We showed that metacomprehension accuracy improved when participants (N = 87 college students) wrote summaries of texts prior to judging their comprehension; however, accuracy only improved when summaries were written after a delay, not when written immediately after reading. We evaluated two hypotheses proposed to account for this delayed-summarization effect (the accessibility hypothesis and the situation model hypothesis). The data suggest that participants based metacomprehension judgments more on the gist of texts when they generated summaries after a delay; whereas, they based judgments more on details when they generated summaries immediately after reading. Focusing on information relevant to the situation model of a text (the gist of a text) produced higher levels of metacomprehension accuracy, which is consistent with situation model hypothesis.

Original languageAmerican English
Pages (from-to)110-118
Number of pages9
JournalActa Psychologica
Volume128
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2008

Keywords

  • Metacognition
  • Metacomprehension
  • Self-regulated learning

EGS Disciplines

  • Curriculum and Instruction
  • Teacher Education and Professional Development

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Why Do Delayed Summaries Improve Metacomprehension Accuracy?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this