ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022
Understanding Individual Differences in Metacognitive Strategy Use, Task Demand, and Performance in Integrated L2 Speaking Assessment Tasks.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mapping the Distribution and Depth of Metacognitive Processes in Generative AI-Assisted Learning: Evidence from Interaction Logs and Concurrent Think-Aloud Protocols.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- From self-regulated learning to computer-delivered integrated speaking testing: Does monitoring always monitor?Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated the concept of individual differences (IDs) in the use of metacognitive strategies (planning, problem-solving, monitoring, and evaluating) and its relationship with task demand and learner performance within Kormos' Bilingual Speech Production Model from the lens of Chinese English-as-foreign-language (EFL) learners in the context of integrated L2 speaking assessment. To measure metacognitive strategies, we administered an inventory on 134 Chinese EFL learners after they completed four integrated L2 speaking assessment tasks. Descriptive analysis and multiple linear regression were adopted for data analysis, and results show that: (a) IDs displayed variance in Chinese EFL learners' metacognitive strategy use; (b) among the four metacognitive strategies under investigation, problem-solving was reported to be used the most frequently in sharp contrast to monitoring, which had the lowest frequency; (c) metacognitive strategies worked interactively, responding to task demands involved in the four integrated L2 speaking assessment tasks; and (d) Chinese EFL learners' use of metacognitive strategies, in individual and interactive working modes, had no relationship with their speaking performance. These results are expected to present some insights into the role of IDs in metacognitive strategy use during L2 speech production under assessment conditions, which will add robust evidence to the existing literature on L2 speaking, in particular on metacognitive strategy use in L2 speaking assessment. In the meantime, the findings will provide some empirical validation support for Kormos' model, which will further provide some implications for L2 speaking instruction and L2 assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.