Search

It is well established in educational research that metacognitive monitoring of performance assessed by self-reports, for instance, asking students to report their confidence in provided answers, is based on heuristic cues rather than on actual success in the task. Subjective self-reports are also used in educational research on cognitive load, where they refer to the perceived amount of mental effort invested in or difficulty of each task item. In the present study, we examined the potential underlying bases and the predictive value of mental effort and difficulty appraisals compared to confidence appraisals by applying metacognitive concepts and paradigms. In three experiments, participants faced verbal logic problems or one of two non-verbal reasoning tasks. In a between-participants design, each task item was followed by either mental effort, difficulty, or confidence appraisals. We examined the associations between the various appraisals, response time, and success rates. Consistently across all experiments, we found that mental effort and difficulty appraisals were associated more strongly than confidence with response time. Further, while all appraisals were highly predictive of solving success, the strength of this association was stronger for difficulty and confidence appraisals (which were similar) than for mental effort appraisals. We conclude that mental effort and difficulty appraisals are prone to misleading cues like other metacognitive judgments and are based on unique underlying processes. These findings challenge the accepted notion that mental effort appraisals can serve as reliable reflections of cognitive load.

Background: Hyper-video technology allows reflection on learning materials by writing personal notes and by interactions with lecturers and peers through shared posts and replies. While research shows that integrating hyper-videos in educational systems can promote the learning processes and outcomes, an open question remains regarding its actual utilization patterns by students and teachers. Objectives: The study aimed to reveal the extent to which students utilize different functions of hyper-videos in real-life learning contexts, and to examine the role of instructional design on hyper-video utilization. Method: In a mixed-method design, the study characterized active and passive interactions in hyper-videos in higher education courses, and amongst active interactions, compared shared versus private annotations. Additionally, the study compared voluntary and mandatory instructional design for promoting hyper-video interactions. In particular, we used learning analytics to explore hyper-video patterns in 25 undergraduate and graduate courses. Results and Discussion: A log analysis revealed that students wrote most of the posts, while lecturers mainly provided replies to students' posts. Private annotations were more prevalent than shared writing, pointing to the unfulfilled potential of hyper-video annotations to benefit from collaborative learning. A qualitative analysis on instructional design was consistent with quantitative findings, revealing important differences between the courses with mandatory versus voluntary hyper-video integration in pedagogical design, and in cognitive presence and teaching presence, based on the community of inquiry framework. Major takeaways: Findings point to an unfulfilled potential of hyper-video technology to promote active and collaborative learning. This highlights the role of design and instructive guidance when integrating technology into educational systems.

Academic dishonesty has been growing in both digital and analog settings. The present study aimed to generalize the ethical dissonance index (EDI), which was established in a sample of Israeli school students as the gap between the pervasiveness of academic dishonesty and its perceived legitimacy. Furthermore, the study examined how technology, dishonesty type and individual differences affect these factors. The study employed a scenario-based approach -- an indirect strategy for deducing academic dishonest behaviors. Participants were 1055 school students from various grade levels, geographic locations and religious/ethnic sectors. Results regarding the role of technology revealed that, overall, digital academic dishonesty was less pervasive and deemed more legitimate compared to analog dishonesty. However, this relationship varied as a function of dishonesty type. Findings confirmed that students experienced some level of ethical dissonance, generalizing the EDI. Notably, individual differences did not affect the relationship between media, dishonesty type and the EDI.

Screen inferiority in performance and metacognitive processes has been repeatedly found with text learning. Common explanations for screen inferiority relate to technological and physiological disadvantages associated with extensive reading on screen. However, recent studies point to lesser recruitment of mental effort on screen than on paper. Learning tasks involving a heavy reading burden confound technological and physiological media differences with potential media effects on recruitment of mental effort. The present study focused on media effects on effort recruitment. We examined whether screen inferiority remains even with a brief task that nevertheless requires effort recruitment. In two experiments, participants faced three short math problems that require systematic processing to solve correctly. We examined media effect on solving these problems, and the potential of disturbed perceptual fluency (i.e., disfluent versus fluent fonts) to induce effort investment. Overall, there were no performance differences between the media. However, when collecting confidence ratings, disfluency improved performance on screen and hindered it on paper. Only on paper confidence ratings were sensitive to performance differences associated with fluency, and resolution was better with the disfluent font than with the fluent font. Correspondingly, another sample reported on their preference of media for solving the problems. They expressed a clear reluctance to working on screen despite the task being brief. This preference is suggestive of reliable meta-metacognitive judgments reflecting the general lower quality of metacognitive processes on screen. The findings call for considering medium and presentation format effects on metacognitive processing when designing computerized environments, even for brief tasks.