学习不良儿童的元认知偏差及矫正

Metacognitive illusions or metacognitive bias is a concept that is a homologous with metacognitve monitor accuracy. In the dissertation, metacognitive illusions mainly refers to the absolute differences between judgment of learning (JOL) and recall because individuals are misguided by some invalid cues or information. JOL is one kind of metacognitive judgments, which is the prediction about the future performance of learned materials. Its mechanism and accuracy are the key issues in the study of JOL. Cue-utilization framework proposed by Koriat (1997) summarized the previous findings and provided a significant advance in understanding how people make JOL. However, the model is not able to explain individual differences in the accuracy of JOL. From the perspective of people’s cognitive bound, our study use posterior associative word pairs easy to produce metacognitive bias to explore the deeper psychological mechanism of metacontive bias. Moreover, we plan to investigate the cause to result in higher metacognitive illusions of children with LD. Based on these, the study tries to look for the method of mending metacognitive illusions. At the same time, we will summarize the findings of this study and previous literatures, and propose a revesied theory for explaining children’s with LD cue selection and utilization according to Koriat’s cue-utilization model. The results of the present study indicated that: (1) Children showed stable metacognitive illusions for the weak associative and posterior associative word pairs, it was not true for strong associative word pairs. It was higher metacognitive illusions for children with LD than normal children. And it was significant grade differences for metacognitive illusions. A priori associative strength exerted a weaker effect on JOL than it did on recall. (2) Children with LD mainly utilized retrieval fluency to make JOL across immediate and delay conditions. However, for normal children, it showed some distinction between encoding fluency and retrieval fluency as potential cues for JOL across immediate and delay conditions. Obviously, children with LD lacked certain flexibility for cue selection and utilization. (3)When word pairs were new list, it showed higher metacognitve transfer effects for analytic inferential group than heuristic inferential group for normal children in the second block. And metacognitive relative accuracy got increased for both children with and without LD across the experimental conditions. However, it was significantly improved only for normal children in analytic inferential group.