Cited by 815Innovative Teaching and Learning MethodsEducational Strategies and EpistemologiesEducational and Psychological Assessments

Focusing the Conceptual Lens on Metacognition, Self-regulation, and Self-regulated Learning

Dinsmore, Daniel L., Alexander, Patricia A., Loughlin, Sandra M.·2008·Educational Psychology Review

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10648-008-9083-6

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dinsmore, D. L., Alexander, P. A., & Loughlin, S. M.
Affiliations
University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Corresponding author
Dinsmore, Daniel L.
Venue
Educational Psychology Review
Published
2008-08-02
Volume
20
Issue
4
Pages
391-409
ISSN
  • 1040-726X (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-336X
OpenAlex
W1965275228
Cited by
815
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 39 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 61 · 2023: 76 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 58 · 2020: 61 · 2019: 56 · 2018: 43 · 2017: 50 · 2016: 43 · 2015: 51 · 2014: 39 · 2013: 48 · 2012: 32
FWCI
37.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Educational Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational and Psychological Assessments
Keywords
metacognition, self-regulation, student self-regulation, construct definition, conceptual boundaries, terminology misuse, prompting

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review