The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comprehension Monitoring: What It Is and What We Know about It
Abstract
COMPREHENSION MONITORING is defined as a metacognitive process which is affected by person, strategy, and task variables. It is viewed as an executive function, essential for competent reading, which directs the reader's cognitive processes as he/she strives to make sense of incoming textual information. While reading comprehension is of primary concern, studies of oral communication adequacy have been prominent in metacognitive research and are touched upon in this review. Considered more fully are studies of problem detection, i.e., of detecting inconsistencies in oral and written discourse with both listening and reading tasks. Self-report studies of problem detection and strategy use involving protocol analysis, interview data, and other self-report tasks are reviewed. Investigations which deal primarily with monitoring (fix-up) strategies are examined, even though studies dealing with recall (study) strategies are not included. Conclusions about research findings are drawn, suggestions are made regarding methodology, and instructional implications are suggested.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Feedback and Self-Regulated Learning: A Theoretical Synthesis
Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543065003245 · Cited by 3,334
Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Bryant, P. (2004) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.1.31 · Cited by 1,496
The instruction of reading comprehension
Pearson, P. D., & Gallagher, M. C. (1983) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1016/0361-476x(83)90019-x · Cited by 1,177
Beyond Amplification: Using the computer to Reorganize Mental Functioning
Pea, R. D. (1985) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2004_2 · Cited by 556
Kim, Y.-S. G. (2017) · Scientific Studies of Reading · doi:10.1080/10888438.2017.1291643 · Cited by 393
Metadata
- Authors
- Wagoner, S. A.
- Venue
- Reading Research Quarterly
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1983
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 328
- ISSN
- 0034-0553 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1963870862
- Cited by
- 174
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 17.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.