Cited by 252Innovative Teaching and Learning MethodsWriting and Handwriting EducationEducational Strategies and Epistemologies

Enhancing self-regulated learning by writing learning protocols

Nückles, Matthias, Hübner, Sandra, Renkl, Alexander·2009·Learning and Instruction

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.05.002

Cites

50 of 50 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

2 of the 52 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nückles, M., Hübner, S., & Renkl, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Göttingen (DE)
  • University of Freiburg (DE)
Corresponding author
Nückles, Matthias
Venue
Learning and Instruction
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-06
Volume
19
Issue
3
Pages
259-271
ISSN
0959-4752 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1981415423
Cited by
252
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 13
FWCI
18.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Learning and Instruction (publishedVersion)
  • GRO (submittedVersion)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Education › Writing and Handwriting Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
Keywords
student self-regulation, learning protocols, prompting, metacognitive prompts, comprehension

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