CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 16Developmental and Educational NeuropsychologyEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentChild and Animal Learning Development

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Time-Based Measures of Monitoring in Association With Executive Functions in Kindergarten Children

Kälin, Sonja, Roebers, Claudia M.·2020·Zeitschrift für Psychologie
DOI 10.1027/2151-2604/a000422
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract. Repeatedly, the notion has been put forward that metacognition (MC) and executive functions (EF) share common grounds, as both describe higher order cognitive processes and involve monitoring. However, only few studies addressed this issue empirically and so far their findings are rather inconsistent. Addressing the question whether measurement differences may in part be responsible for the mixed results, the current study included explicitly reported as well as time-based measures of metacognitive monitoring and related them to EF. A total of 202 children aged 4–6 years were assessed in terms of EF (inhibition, working memory, shifting) and monitoring. While there was no significant link between explicitly reported confidence and EF, latencies of monitoring judgments were significantly related to time- and accuracy-based measures of EF. Our findings support the association between EF and MC and the assumption that better inhibition abilities help children to engage in more thorough monitoring.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1027/2151-2604/a000422

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Inhibition is significantly correlated with latencies of monitoring judgments for correct and incorrect answers in 4- to 6-year-old children, even after controlling for age.

    “Inhibition was found to be significantly correlated to the latencies of monitoring judgments for correct and incorrect answers, even after controlling for age.”

    From Longitudinal associations between executive functions and metacognitive monitoring in 5- to 8-year-olds (2022) · cites this paper as Kälin & Roebers (2020)

  • Based on the significant association between inhibition and time-based monitoring measures, Kälin & Roebers (2020) suggested that better inhibition skills may help children hesitate when providing monitoring judgments and thus enable children to engage in more thorough monitoring.

    “Based on the significant association between inhibition and time-based monitoring measures, Kälin & Roebers (2020) suggested that better inhibition skills may help children hesitate when providing monitoring judgments and thus enable children to engage in more thorough monitoring.”

    From Longitudinal associations between executive functions and metacognitive monitoring in 5- to 8-year-olds (2022) · cites this paper as Kälin & Roebers (2020)

  • Previous research provided correlational evidence that inhibition might serve as a prerequisite of monitoring skills in young children.

    “Previous research provided correlational evidence that inhibition might serve as a prerequisite of monitoring skills in young children (Bryce et al., 2015;Kälin & Roebers, 2020).”

    From Longitudinal associations between executive functions and metacognitive monitoring in 5- to 8-year-olds (2022) · cites this paper as Kälin & Roebers, 2020

  • Previous research with young children suggests that inhibition may be a prerequisite for monitoring skills.

    “Previous research with young children suggests that inhibition may be a prerequisite for monitoring skills.”

    From Longitudinal associations between executive functions and metacognitive monitoring in 5- to 8-year-olds (2022) · cites this paper as Kälin & Roebers, 2020

  • Longer latencies of confidence judgments are related to lower confidence ratings.

    “This assumption is supported by the finding that longer latencies of CJ are related to lower confidence ratings (Kälin & Roebers, 2020;Pleskac & Busemeyer, 2010).”

    From Longitudinal associations between executive functions and metacognitive monitoring in 5- to 8-year-olds (2022) · cites this paper as Kälin & Roebers, 2020

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 38

  1. Ackerman R., 2011, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17, 406
  2. Archibald S. J., 1999, Child Neuropsychology, 5, 115, 10.1076/chin.5.2.115.3167 · DOI
  3. Atance C. M., 2010, Cognition, 116, 297, 10.1016/j.cognition.2010.05.008 · DOI
  4. 10.1016/j.jecp.2019.01.012 · DOI
  5. Blair C., 2007, Child Development, 78, 647, 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01019.x · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.624 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1007/s11409-014-9120-4 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Camerota M., 2019, Psychological Assessment, 31, 995, 10.1037/pas0000725 · DOI
  9. 10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Diamond A., 2007, Science, 318, 1387, 10.1126/science.1151148 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Dunlosky J., 2005, Cognitive Technology, 10, 4
  12. Dunlosky J., 2008, Metacognition
  13. 10.1016/j.dcn.2011.12.002 · DOI
  14. Espinet S. D., 2013, Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 4, 3, 10.1016/j.dcn.2012.11.009 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Koriat A., 1997, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 349, 10.1037/0096-3445.126.4.349 · DOI · Paper page
  16. 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00907.x · DOI
  17. Lyons K. E., 2011, Child Development, 82, 1778, 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01649.x · DOI
  18. Lyons, K. E. & Zelazo, P. D. (2011). Monitoring, metacognition, and executive function: Elucidating the role of self-reflection in the development of self-regulation. In J. B. Benson (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 40) (pp. 379–412). Elsevier. · DOI
  19. 10.3758/s13428-011-0168-7 · DOI
  20. McCabe, L. A., Cunnington, M. & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2004). The development of self-regulation in young children: Individual characteristics and environmental contexts. In R. F. Baumeister, & K. D. Vohs (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications (pp. 340–356). Guilford Press.
  21. Metcalfe J., 2012, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24, 1571, 10.1162/jocn_a_00228 · DOI
  22. Metcalfe J., 2008, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 1084
  23. Metcalfe, J. & Schwartz, B. L. (2016). The ghost in the machine: Self-reflective consciousness and the neuroscience of metacognition. In J. Dunlosky, & S. K. Tauber (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of metamemory (pp. 407–437). Oxford University Press.
  24. Monette S., 2011, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 109, 158, 10.1016/j.jecp.2011.01.008 · DOI
  25. Moriguchi Y., 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106, 6017, 10.1073/pnas.0809747106 · DOI
  26. Moriguchi Y., 2013, Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, Article 867, 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00867 · DOI · Paper page
  27. 10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60053-5 · DOI · Paper page
  28. O’Leary A. P., 2017, Child Development, 88, 1015, 10.1111/cdev.12644 · DOI
  29. Roebers, C. M. (2014). Children’s deliberate memory development: The contribution of strategies and metacognitive processes. In P. J. Bauer, & R. Fivush (Eds.), The Wiley handbook on the development of children’s memory (pp. 865–894). Wiley Blackwell.
  30. 10.1016/j.dr.2017.04.001 · DOI · Paper page
  31. Roebers C. M., 2020, Metacognition and Learning, 15, 31, 10.1007/s11409-019-09217-4 · DOI
  32. Roebers C. M., 2019, Developmental Psychology, 55, 2077, 10.1037/dev0000776 · DOI
  33. Schneider, W. & Löffler, E. (2016). The development of metacognitive knowledge in children and adolescents. In J. Dunlosky, & S. K. Tauber (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of metamemory (pp. 491–518). Oxford University Press.
  34. Spiess M. A., 2015, Swiss Journal of Psychology
  35. 10.1007/s11409-016-9168-4 · DOI
  36. Van Loon M. H., 2013, Metacognition and Learning, 8, 173, 10.1007/s11409-013-9100-0 · DOI
  37. Zelazo P. D., 2003, Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 68, 1, 10.1111/j.0037-976X.2003.00261.x · DOI · Paper page
  38. Zoelch, C., Seitz, K. & Schumann-Hengsteler, R. (2005). From rag (bag) s to riches: Measuring the developing central executive. In W. Schneider, R. Schumann-Hengsteler, & B. Sodian (Eds.), Young children’s cognitive development. Interrelationships among executive functioning, working memory, verbal ability and theory of mind (pp. 39–69). Erlbaum.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Kälin, S., & Roebers, C. M.
Affiliations
University of Bern (CH)
ORCID
Venue
Zeitschrift für Psychologie
Publisher
Hogrefe Publishing Group
Published
2020-10
Volume
228
Issue
4
Pages
244-253
ISSN
  • 0044-3409 (ISSN-L)
  • 2190-8370
  • 2151-2604
DOI
10.1027/2151-2604/a000422
OpenAlex
W3096075631
Cited by
16
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2020: 1
FWCI
3.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Zeitschrift für Psychologie (publishedVersion)
  • BORIS (University Library Bern) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
  • Social Sciences › Education › Early Childhood Education and Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
metacognition, executive function, metacognitive monitoring, metacognitive confidence, inhibition, working memory, cognitive flexibility, kindergarten children

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