Abstract
In the present research, we examined the relationship between readers’ domain knowledge and their ability to judge their comprehension of novel domain-related material. Participants with varying degrees of baseball knowledge read five texts on baseball-related topics and five texts on non-baseball-related topics, predicted their performance, and completed tests for each text. Baseball knowledge was positively related to absolute accuracy within the baseball domain but was unrelated to relative accuracy within the baseball domain. Also, the readers showed a general underconfidence bias, but the bias was less extreme for higher knowledge readers. The results challenge common assumptions that experts’ metacognitive judgments are less accurate than novices’. Results involving topic familiarity ratings and a no-reading control group suggest that higher knowledge readers are not more likely to ignore text-specific cues in favor of a domain familiarity heuristic, but they do appear to make more effective use of domain familiarity in predicting absolute performance levels.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adams, B. C., Bell, L. C., &Perfetti, C. A. (1995). A trading relationship between reading skill and domain knowledge in children’s text comprehension.Discourse Processes,20, 307–323.
Baker, L. (1989). Metacognition, comprehension monitoring, and the adult reader.Educational Psychology Review, 1, 3–38.
Bol, L., &Hacker, D. J. (2001). The effect of practice tests on students’ calibration and performance.Journal of Experimental Education,69, 133–151.
Bol, L., Hacker, D. J., O’Shea, P., &Allen, D. (2005). The influence of practice and achievement level on calibration accuracy.Journal of Experimental Education,73, 269–290.
Brown, A. L., &DeLoache, J. S. (1978). Skills, plans, and selfregulation. In R. S. Siegler (Ed.),Children’s thinking: What develops? Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., &Farr, M. (Eds.) (1988).The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dunlosky, J., &Lipko, A. (2007). Metacomprehension: A brief history and how to improve its accuracy.Current Directions in Psychological Science,16, 228–232.
Dunlosky, J., &Rawson, K. A. (2005). Why does rereading improve metacomprehension accuracy? Evaluating the levels-of-disruption hypothesis for the rereading effect.Discourse Processes,40, 37–55.
Ericsson, K. A., &Kintsch, W. (1995). Long-term working memory.Psychological Review,102, 211–245.
Feltovich, P. J., Prietula, M. J., &Ericsson, K. A. (2006). Studies of expertise from psychological perspectives. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.),Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 39–68). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fincher-Kiefer, R., Post, T. A., Greene, T. R., &Voss, J. F. (1988). On the role of prior knowledge and task demands in the processing of text.Journal of Memory & Language,27, 416–428.
Finn, B., &Metcalfe, J. (2007). The role of memory for past test in the underconfidence with practice effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,33, 238–244.
Fischer, P. M., &Mandl, H. (1984). Learner, text variables, and control of text comprehension and recall. In H. Mandl, N. L. Stein, & T. Trabasso (Eds.),Learning and comprehension of text (pp. 213–254). London: Erlbaum.
Glaser, R., &Chi, M. T. H. (1988). Overview. In M. T. H. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. Farr (Eds.),The nature of expertise (pp. xv-xxvii). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Glenberg, A. M., &Epstein, W. (1987). Inexpert calibration of comprehension.Memory & Cognition,15, 84–93.
Glenberg, A. M., Sanocki, T., Epstein, W., &Morris, C. (1987). Enhancing calibration of comprehension.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,116, 119–136.
Glover, J. (1989). Reading ability and the calibrator of comprehension.Educational Research Quarterly,13, 7–11.
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, 93–103.
Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., &Bahbahani, K. (2008). Explaining calibration accuracy in classroom contexts: The effects of incentives, reflection, and explanatory style.Metacognition & Learning,3, 101–121.
Hacker, D. J.,Bol, L., Horgan, D. D., &Rakow, E. (2000). Test prediction and performance in a classroom context.Journal of Educational Psychology,92, 160–170.
Hambrick, D. Z., &Engle, R. W. (2002). Effects of domain knowledge, working memory capacity, and age on cognitive performance: An investigation of the knowledge-is-power hypothesis.Cognitive Psychology,44, 339–387.
Jacoby, L. L., Bjork, R. A., &Kelley, C. M. (1994). Illusions of comprehension, competence, and remembering. In D. Druckman & R. A. Bjork (Eds.),Learning, remembering, and believing: Enhancing human performance (pp. 57–80). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Kelemen, W. L., Frost, P. J., &Weaver, C. A., III (2000). Individual differences in metacognition: Evidence against a general metacognitive ability.Memory & Cognition,28, 92–107.
Kintsch, W. (1998).Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Koriat, A. (1997). Monitoring one’s knowledge during study: A cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,126, 349–370.
Koriat, A., &Bjork, R. A. (2006). Illusions of competence during study can be remedied by manipulations that enhance learners’ sensitivity to retrieval conditions at test.Memory & Cognition,34, 959–972.
Koriat, A., Sheffer, L., &Ma’ayan, H. (2002). Comparing objective and subjective learning curves: Judgments of learning exhibit increased underconfidence with practice.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,131, 147–162.
Lin, L., Zabrucky, K., &Moore, D. (1997). The relations among interest, self-assessed comprehension, and comprehension performance in young adults.Reading Research & Instruction,36, 127–139.
Maki, R. H. (1998a). Metacomprehension of text: Influence of absolute confidence level on bias and accuracy. In D. L. Medin (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 38, pp. 223–248). San Diego: Academic Press.
Maki, R. H. (1998b). Test predictions over text material. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.),Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 117–144). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Maki, R. H., &Berry, S. L. (1984). Metacomprehension of text material.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,10, 663–679.
Maki, R. H., Jonas, D., &Kallod, M. (1994). The relationship between comprehension and metacomprehension ability.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,1, 126–129.
Maki, R. H., &Serra, M. (1992). Role of practice tests in the accuracy of test predictions on text material.Journal of Educational Psychology,84, 200–210.
Maki, R. H., Shields, M., Wheeler, A. E., &Zacchilli, T. L. (2005). Individual differences in absolute and relative metacomprehension accuracy.Journal of Educational Psychology,97, 723–731.
Miller, L. M. S., Cohen, J. A., &Wingfield, A. (2006). Contextual knowledge reduces demands on working memory during reading.Memory & Cognition,34, 1355–1367.
Miller, L. M. S., Stine-Morrow, E. A. L., Kirkorian, H. L., &Conroy, M. L. (2004). Age differences in knowledge-driven reading.Journal of Educational Psychology,96, 811–821.
Nelson, T. O. (1984). A comparison of current measures of the accuracy of feeling-of-knowing predictions.Psychological Bulletin,95, 109–133.
Nelson, T. O. (1996). Gamma is a measure of the accuracy of predicting performance on one item relative to another item, not of the absolute performance on an individual item.Applied Cognitive Psychology,10, 257–260.
Nelson, T. O., &Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G. H. Bower (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 26, pp. 125–173). New York: Academic Press.
Pierce, B. H., &Smith, S. M. (2001). The postdiction superiority effect in metacomprehension of text.Memory & Cognition,29, 62–67.
Pressley, M., Snyder, B. L., Levin, J. R., Murray, H. G., &Ghatala, E. S. (1987). Perceived readiness for examination performance (PREP) produced by initial reading of text and text containing adjunct questions.Reading Research Quarterly,22, 219–236.
Rawson, K. A., Dunlosky, J., &Thiede, K. W. (2000). The rereading effect: Metacomprehension accuracy improves across reading trials.Memory & Cognition, 28, 1004–1010.
Recht, D. R., &Leslie, L. (1988). Effect of prior knowledge on good and poor readers’ memory of text.Journal of Educational Psychology,80, 16–20.
Schneider, W. (2002). Memory development in childhood. In U. Goswami (Ed.),Blackwell handbook of childhood cognitive development (pp. 236–256). Oxford: Blackwell.
Schneider, W., Körkel, J., &Weinert, F. E. (1989). Domain-specific knowledge and memory performance: A comparison of high- and low-aptitude children.Journal of Educational Psychology,81, 306–312.
Spilich, G. J., Vesonder, G. T., Chiesi, H. L., &Voss, J. F. (1979). Text processing of domain-related information for individuals with high and low domain knowledge.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,18, 275–290.
Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M. C. M., &Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts.Journal of Educational Psychology,95, 66–73.
Thiede, K. W., Dunlosky, J., Griffin, T. D., &Wiley, J. (2005). Understanding the delayed keyword effect on metacomprehension accuracy.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,31, 1267–1280.
Thiede, K. W., Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., & Anderson, M. C. M. (in press). Poor metacomprehension accuracy as a result of inappropriate cue use.Discourse Processes.
Thiede, K. W., Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., &Redford, J. S. (2009). Metacognitive monitoring during and after reading. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.),Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 85–106). New York: Routledge.
Voss, J. F., Vesonder, G. T., &Spilich, G. J. (1980). Text generation and recall by high-knowledge and low-knowledge individuals.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,19, 651–667.
Weaver, C. A., III (1990). Constraining factors in calibration of comprehension.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,16, 214–222.
Wiley, J. (2005). A fair and balanced look at the news: What affects memory for controversial arguments?Journal of Memory & Language,53, 95–109.
Wiley, J., Griffin, T. D., &Thiede, K. W. (2005). Putting the comprehension in metacomprehension.Journal of General Psychology,132, 408–428.
Winne, P. H., &Hadwin, A. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.),Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277–304). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Yates, J. F. (1990).Judgment and decision making. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by Grants R305H03170 and R305B07460 from the Institute for Education Sciences Cognition and Student Learning program to T.D.G., Keith W. Thiede, and J.W. Writing of the manuscript was supported by a Humboldt Research Fellowship for Experienced Researchers to the third author. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the funding agency.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Griffin, T.D., Jee, B.D. & Wiley, J. The effects of domain knowledge on metacomprehension accuracy. Memory & Cognition 37, 1001–1013 (2009). https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.37.7.1001
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.37.7.1001