Do Confidence Ratings Reactively Modify Children’s Academic Assessment Performance? Negative Answer from a Three-Year Longitudinal Study

The reactivity effect of metacognitive judgments on first-order task performance has received increased research attention. Previous studies showed that soliciting retrospective confidence ratings (CRs) reactively enhances task performance itself, such as performance in decision making and reasoning tasks, especially for those with high self-confidence. It remains unknown whether CRs can improve students’ academic assessment performance in real educational settings. The current study recruited 795 fourth-grade elementary school children to explore if making CRs reactively affects students’ academic assessment performance in two main subjects (i.e., Chinese Language and Mathematics). The data were collected across six waves with half-year intervals. From Wave 2, children either provided (CR group) or did not provide CRs (no-CR group) when completing standardized academic assessments. The results showed Bayesian evidence supporting the claim that making CRs does not influence children’s academic assessment performance (both the average performance across waves 2–6 and the performance in each wave) in both subjects. Furthermore, children’s self-confidence did not moderate the reactive influence of CRs. The results from multilevel regression analyses re-confirmed the above conclusions. Possible explanations for the absence of the reactivity effect of CRs on children’s academic assessment performance are discussed.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Intelligence
Published
2024-09-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence12090091
Primary Topic
Memory Processes and Influences
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Do Confidence Ratings Reactively Modify Children’s Academic Assessment Performance? Negative Answer from a Three-Year Longitudinal Study

Ningxin Su, Chunliang Yang, Tian Fan, Xiao Hu et al.
Journal of Intelligence
Memory Processes and Influences
article

Do Confidence Ratings Reactively Modify Children’s Academic Assessment Performance? Negative Answer from a Three-Year Longitudinal Study

Ningxin Su, Chunliang Yang, Tian Fan, Xiao Hu, Wenbo Zhao, Jun Zheng, Liang Luo, Baike Li
article en

Abstract

The reactivity effect of metacognitive judgments on first-order task performance has received increased research attention. Previous studies showed that soliciting retrospective confidence ratings (CRs) reactively enhances task performance itself, such as performance in decision making and reasoning tasks, especially for those with high self-confidence. It remains unknown whether CRs can improve students’ academic assessment performance in real educational settings. The current study recruited 795 fourth-grade elementary school children to explore if making CRs reactively affects students’ academic assessment performance in two main subjects (i.e., Chinese Language and Mathematics). The data were collected across six waves with half-year intervals. From Wave 2, children either provided (CR group) or did not provide CRs (no-CR group) when completing standardized academic assessments. The results showed Bayesian evidence supporting the claim that making CRs does not influence children’s academic assessment performance (both the average performance across waves 2–6 and the performance in each wave) in both subjects. Furthermore, children’s self-confidence did not moderate the reactive influence of CRs. The results from multilevel regression analyses re-confirmed the above conclusions. Possible explanations for the absence of the reactivity effect of CRs on children’s academic assessment performance are discussed.

Journal of IntelligenceVol. 12(9)
Zhejiang Normal University (CN), Liaoning Normal University (CN), Beijing Normal University (CN)
National Natural Science Foundation of China, Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 84%
Memory Processes and Influences
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.