Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41295430›Full record

ArticleJournal of Intelligence2025

The Meta-Intelligent Child: Validating the MKIT as a Tool to Develop Metacognitive Knowledge in Early Childhood.

Onciu Oana, Prisacaru Flavia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of Intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Onciu OanaFaculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Department of Educational Sciences, "Alexandru Ioan Cuza" University of Iași, 700554 Iași, Romania.ORCID 0009-0009-7780-8896
Prisacaru FlaviaFaculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Department of Psychology, "Alexandru Ioan Cuza" University of Iași, 700554 Iași, Romania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article presents and validates the Metacognitive Knowledge Intervention for Thinking (MKIT)-an educational framework designed to assess and develop domain-general metacognitive knowledge (MK) in children aged 5 to 9. Moving beyond traditional approaches that examine metacognition within isolated subject areas, this research reconceptualizes MK as a transferable learning resource across content domains and developmental stages. Moreover, by employing a stepped-wedge design-a rigorous but rarely used approach in education-the study introduces a methodological advancement. Simultaneously, MK is operationalized through an ecologically valid and developmentally appropriate format, using visually engaging stories, illustrated scenarios, and interactive tasks integrated within classroom routines. These adaptations enabled young learners to engage meaningfully with abstract metacognitive concepts. Therefore, across three interconnected studies (N = 458), the MKIT provided strong psychometric evidence supporting valid inferences about metacognitive knowledge, age-invariant effects, and substantial gains among children with initially low MK levels. In addition, qualitative data indicated MK transfer across contexts. Thus, these findings position MKIT as a scalable tool, supported by multiple strands of validity evidence, that makes metacognitive knowledge teachable across domains-offering a practical approach to strengthening learning, reducing early achievement gaps, and supporting the development of core components of intelligence.

Indexed as

early childhoodempirical validationmetacognitive knowledgemetacognitive toolstepped-wedge

Identifiers

PMID41295430
PMCPMC12653053

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.