Metacognition, Self-Regulation, and Self-Regulated Learning: Research Recommendations
Open accessThe claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Motivational factors and mindfulness promote self-regulation of learning and self-regulation of academic stress.
“motivational factors and mindfulness promote self-regulation of learning [31, 52] and self-regulation of academic stress [24, 40, 53].”
From Benefits of mindfulness in academic settings: trait mindfulness has incremental validity over motivational factors in predicting academic affect, cognition, and behavior (2022) · cites this paper as [52]
The citation is attached to the learning part of the sentence, not the later academic-stress claim. In “Tie processes firmly with instructional methods” (page unavailable), Schunk says goal-setting instruction might produce gains in self-regulation, but presents this as a prediction to be tested. The paper does not establish that motivational factors generally promote self-regulated learning or address mindfulness. (LLM, conf=0.76)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredPrevious studies have suggested that mindfulness and motivational factors both facilitate effective self-regulation, thereby leading to adaptive outcomes.
“Previous studies have suggested that mindfulness (e.g., see Ostafin et al. [51] for a review) and motivational factors (e.g., see Schunk & Zimmerman [52] for a review) both facilitate effective self-regulation, thereby leading to adaptive outcomes.”
From Benefits of mindfulness in academic settings: trait mindfulness has incremental validity over motivational factors in predicting academic affect, cognition, and behavior (2022) · cites this paper as [52]
The cited sentence uses this reference for the claim that motivational factors facilitate self-regulation and lead to adaptive outcomes, not for its separate mindfulness claim. In “Link processes with academic outcomes” (page unavailable), the paper describes correlations between self-regulation measures and motivation, learning, or achievement, but does not establish motivational factors as facilitators of self-regulation. The “Tie processes firmly with instructional methods” section discusses a proposed test of gains in self-regulation and achievement, not that claimed pathway. (LLM, conf=0.72)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Alexander, J. E., Carr, M., & Schwanenflugel, P. J. (1995). Development of metacognition in gifted children: Directions for future research. Developmental Review, 15, 1-37.
- Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In K. W. Spence, & J. T. Spence (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory, vol. 2 pp. 89-195. New York: Academic.
- Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- Dinsmore, D. L., Alexander, P. A., & Louglin, S. M. (2008). Focusing the conceptual lens on metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review doi:10.1007/s10648-008-9083-6. · DOI · Paper page
- Flavell, J. H. (1985). Cognitive development (2nd. ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- Fox, E., & Riconscente, M. (2008). Metacognition and self-regulation in James, Piaget, and Vygotsky. Educational Psychology Review doi:10.1007/s10648-008-9079-2. · DOI
- Loyens, S. M. M., Magda, J., & Rikers, M. J. P. (2008). Self-directed learning in problem-based learning and its relationships with self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review doi:10.1007/s10648-008-9082-7. · DOI · Paper page
- Maggioni, L., & Parkinson, M. M. (2008). The role of teacher epistemic cognition, epistemic beliefs, and calibration in instruction. Educational Psychology Review. doi:10.1007/s10648-008-9081-8. · DOI
- Winters, F. I., Greene, J. A., & Costich, C. M. (2008). Self-regulation of learning within computer-based learning environments: A critical analysis. Educational Psychology Review doi:10.1007/s10648-008-9080-9. · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Efklides, A. (2011) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2011.538645 · Cited by 1,211 · see citing works
Dignath, C., & Veenman, M. V. J. (2021) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-020-09534-0 · Cited by 403 · see citing works
Dinsmore, D. L., & Alexander, P. A. (2012) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-012-9198-7 · Cited by 205 · see citing works
Evaluating the metacognitive awareness inventory using empirical factor-structure evidence
Harrison, G. M., & Vallin, L. M. (2018) · Metacognition and Learning · doi:10.1007/s11409-017-9176-z · Cited by 182 · see citing works
Metacognition and Self-Regulation in Programming Education: Theories and Exemplars of Use
Loksa, D., Margulieux, L., Becker, B. A., Craig, M., Denny, P., Pettit, R., & Prather, J. (2022) · ACM Transactions on Computing Education · doi:10.1145/3487050 · Cited by 140 · see citing works
Terry, C. A., Mishra, P., & Roseth, C. J. (2016) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.009 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Reliability and Validity Analyses of a Newly Developed Test to Assess Learning Strategy Knowledge
Maag Merki, K., Ramseier, E., & Karlen, Y. (2013) · Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology · doi:10.1891/1945-8959.12.3.391 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
A Conceptual Framework to Integrate Research Programs on Self-Regulation in Education
Wortha, F., Gerjets, P., Azevedo, R., Bernacki, M., Brucker, B., Bühler, B., Ehlis, A.-C., Kasneci, E., Miyake, A., Murayama, K., et al. (2026) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-026-10196-7
- Authors
- Schunk, D. H.
- Affiliations
- University of North Carolina at Greensboro (US)
- Corresponding author
- Schunk, Dale H.
- ORCID
- Schunk, Dale H.
- Venue
- Educational Psychology Review
- Published
- 2008-08-21
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 463-467
- ISSN
- 1040-726X (ISSN-L)
- 1573-336X
- OpenAlex
- W2072274285
- Cited by
- 416
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 31
- FWCI
- 20.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- libres.uncg.edu
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Educational Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
- NC Digital Online Collection of Knowledge and Scholarship (The University of North Carolina at Greensboro) (submittedVersion)
- 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, research recommendations, metacognition assessment, educational outcomes, teaching methods, education policy
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
