Cited by 2,583Memory Processes and InfluencesCognitive Functions and MemoryEducational Strategies and Epistemologies

Metamemory: A Theoretical Framework and New Findings

Nelson, Thomas O.·1990·Psychology of Learning and Motivation

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0079-7421(08)60053-5

Cites

4 of 4 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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nelson, T. O.
Corresponding author
Nelson, Thomas O.
Venue
Psychology of Learning and Motivation
Publisher
Elsevier
Published
1990
Pages
125-173
ISSN
0079-7421 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1598182466
Cited by
2,583
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 178 · 2025: 169 · 2024: 147 · 2023: 205 · 2022: 129 · 2021: 150 · 2020: 138 · 2019: 150 · 2018: 133 · 2017: 107 · 2016: 100 · 2015: 119 · 2014: 111 · 2013: 94 · 2012: 93
FWCI
5.49
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The Psychology of learning and motivation/The psychology of learning and motivation (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
Keywords
metamemory, feeling of knowing, metacognition, recognition memory, memory retrieval, metacognitive regulation, metacognitive monitoring

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