dc.contributor.author | Norman, Elisabeth | |
dc.contributor.author | Pfuhl, Gerit | |
dc.contributor.author | Sæle, Rannveig Grøm | |
dc.contributor.author | Svartdal, Frode | |
dc.contributor.author | Låg, Torstein | |
dc.contributor.author | Dahl, Tove Irene | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2019-12-09T09:53:07Z | |
dc.date.available | 2019-12-09T09:53:07Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2019-10-25 | |
dc.description.abstract | How has the concept of metacognition been used within basic and applied psychological research? We begin our answer
by presenting a broad definition of metacognition, a historical overview of its development and its presence in research databases. To assess which function and facets are most frequently addressed within each of the sub-disciplines, we present results from separate literature searches. We then review how metacognition has been defined and empirically
explored within selected sub-disciplines in terms of typical research questions, conceptual definitions, how the concept
has been measured, and examples of interesting findings and implications. We identify similarities, inconsistencies,
and disagreements across fields and point out areas for future research. Our overall conclusion is that it is useful to consider metacognition as a broad umbrella concept across different domains and across basic and applied research.
Nonetheless, we recommend that researchers be more specific and explicit about their approach and assumptions whenever using metacognition in their research. | en_US |
dc.description | ©American Psychological Association, 2019. This paper is not the copy of record and may not exactly replicate the authoritative document published in the APA journal. Please do not copy or cite without author's permission. The final article is available, upon publication, at: <a href=https://doi.org/10.1177/1089268019883821>https://doi.org/10.1177/1089268019883821. </a> | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Norman E, Pfuhl G, Sæle RG, Låg T, Svartdal F, Dahl TI. Metacognition in psychology
. Review of General Psychology. 2019:1-22 | en_US |
dc.identifier.cristinID | FRIDAID 1741337 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1177/1089268019883821 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1089-2680 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1939-1552 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10037/16825 | |
dc.language.iso | eng | en_US |
dc.publisher | American Psychological Association | en_US |
dc.relation.journal | Review of General Psychology | |
dc.relation.projectID | Norges forskningsråd: 262338 | en_US |
dc.relation.projectID | info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/RCN/FRIMEDBIO/262338/Norway/Too precise or too imprecise: which parameter is gone awry in autism and psychosis// | en_US |
dc.rights.accessRights | openAccess | en_US |
dc.subject | VDP::Social science: 200::Psychology: 260 | en_US |
dc.subject | VDP::Samfunnsvitenskap: 200::Psykologi: 260 | en_US |
dc.title | Metacognition in psychology | en_US |
dc.type.version | acceptedVersion | en_US |
dc.type | Journal article | en_US |
dc.type | Tidsskriftartikkel | en_US |
dc.type | Peer reviewed | en_US |