To know or not to know, is that the question? Exploring the role and assessment of metacognition in cross-cultural contexts
Findings from research in educational and cognitive psychology have shown that metacognition, defined as the awareness, monitoring, and evaluation of one’s knowledge and cognitive processes, exerts substantial influence on individual performance. The majority of this research, however, has only exam...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2013
|
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/10356/97715 http://hdl.handle.net/10220/17758 |
| Summary: | Findings from research in educational and cognitive psychology have shown that metacognition, defined as the awareness, monitoring, and evaluation of one’s knowledge and cognitive processes, exerts substantial influence on individual performance. The majority of this research, however, has only examined metacognitive skill as it applies to academic settings, and has largely overlooked its applications to other contexts, such as cross-cultural performance. To better understand the role of metacognition in cross-cultural contexts, as well as the means by which it should be assessed, two studies were conducted that jointly explored the construct validity of a well-established self-reported measure of metacognition (i.e., the Metacognitive subscale of the Cultural Intelligence Scale; CQS), as well as its relative utility in predicting cross-cultural performance. Results from Study 1 indicated that self-reported metacognition (as measured by the CQS) is distinct from personality, but highly correlated with the other subfacets of self-reported cultural intelligence. Analyses using structural equation modeling (SEM) further revealed that peers (n = 206) were more accurate in rating participants’ cultural intelligence than were participants themselves (n = 206). Results from Study 2, which explored the criterion-related validity of the Metacognitive subscale of the CQS, in particular, demonstrated that self-reported metacognition did not predict international students’ adaptation (n = 50). These findings are discussed in light of other research that has called into question the validity of self-reported measures of metacognition, in general. |
|---|