In this research study, Prof. David Williams examines processes that affect self-regulated learning ini children with ASD. The researcher looks at metacognitive monitoring and metacognitive control in ASD. The findings have important implications for educators and in informing equality and diversity policies.
More information about the Kent author here
Find the full paper here
About
Metacognition refers to an individual’s beliefs and knowledge about cognition. Put simply, metacognition involves thinking about thinking. It is believed to consist of monitoring processes (the ability to accurately represent one’s own mental states) and control processes (the ability to control one’s cognitive processes effectively). These processes play very important roles in self-regulated learning. For example, whilst revising for an exam, if an individual is able to accurately assess what information they know/do not know, they can employ more effective revision techniques.
A classic task to measure metacognitive monitoring is a judgment of confidence (JOC) task, which involves participants answering questions about recently-studied material and then reporting their confidence in the answers they provided. Additionally, in some JOC tasks participants are given the chance to exclude some of their answers because of low confidence, and this aspect of metacognition reflects metacognitive control.
In this project, Prof. David Williams examined metacognitive monitoring and metacognitive control in children with ASD. The findings have important implications for educators and in informing equality and diversity policies.
Research Objectives
• To examine both metacognitive monitoring and metacognitive control in children with ASD.
Programme and Methodology
• Participants were children with ASD and typically developing (TD) children who were matched for IQ and age.
• All participants completed a JOC task measuring metacognitive monitoring and control.
Findings
• Compared to TD children, children with ASD showed diminished accuracy in their judgments of confidence, indicating metacognitive monitoring impairments.
• Children with ASD used monitoring to influence control processes significantly less than TD children, despite little evidence of impairments in overall control ability.
Impact
• This project offered new and important insight on metacognitive processes in ASD.
• The findings demonstrate that metacognitive monitoring, but not metacognitive control is impaired in children with ASD.
• Children with ASD seem to use metacognitive monitoring less for the purpose of metacognitive control. This suggests that the means by which children with ASD achieved control over their behavioural choice differs from TD children.
• The project offers clear suggestions for educational settings with children with ASD.
• Impairments in metacognitive learning could affects children’s academic performance. It important for educators to know that metacognitive control is undiminished. This skill could be used as a strength in learning.