바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
사전등록 바로가기
 

logo

  • ENGLISH
  • P-ISSN1229-067X
  • E-ISSN2734-1127
  • KCI

ISSN : 1229-067X

논문 상세

이전 다음
논문 투고

Vol.31 No.1

Citation Share

성실성, 인지 능력, 메타인지 능력이 학습의 전이에 미치는 영향

The effect of conscientiousness, cognitive ability, and metacognitive ability on transfer of learning

한국심리학회지: 일반 / Korean Journal of Psychology: General, (P)1229-067X; (E)2734-1127
2012, v.31 no.1, pp.221-238
최송아 (연세대학교)
손현국 (연세대학교)
손영우 (연세대학교)
최송아, 손현국, & 손영우. (2012). 성실성, 인지 능력, 메타인지 능력이 학습의 전이에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지: 일반, 31(1), 221-238.

초록

본 연구는, 기질적인 요소인 성격 특질과 인지 능력, 그리고 발달 가능하다고 알려져 있는 메타인지 능력-얼마나 자기 자신의 수행을 정확하게 판단하는가-이 학습의 전이에 미치는 영향을 알아보기 위해 수행되었다. 참가자들은 성실한 성격과 인지 능력을 측정하는 검사에 응답한 뒤 컴퓨터 화면에 제시되는 두 도형의 일치 여부를 판단하는 시각 변별 과제를 수행하였다. 시각 변별 과제는 학습 단계 여덟 블록과, 학습 단계와는 다른 도형으로 이루어진 전이 단계 여덟 블록으로 나누어져 있다. 참가들이 자신의 수행에 대해 추정한 점수와 실제 점수의 차이를 통해 메타인지적 정확성을 계산하였으며, 이렇게 측정한 메타인지 능력과 기질적 특성이 전이 학습에 미치는 영향을 살펴보고자 하였다. 분석 결과, 난이도와 상관없이 성격과 인지 능력은 전이 단계의 수행을 유의미하게 예측해주지 못하였다. 자신의 능력을 정확히 알고 있는 집단만이 훈련 단계에서 학습 효과가 나타나고, 이러한 학습 효과가 전이단계까지 이어지는 것을 확인함으로써, 메타인지 능력만이 전이 단계의 수행에 유의미한 차이를 가져오는 것을 관찰할 수 있었다.

keywords
Conscientiousness, Cognitive ability, Metacognition, Transfer of learning, 성실성, 인지 능력, 메타인지, 학습의 전이

Abstract

Metacognition, 'cognition of cognition', is one of the most important factor in learning. In this study, we aim to examine the influence of cognitive ability, conscientiousness of Big5 traits, and metacognition which means how one accurately evaluates oneself on transfer of learning. Participants answered questions regarding their trait and cognitive ability, and performed the visual discrimination task. The task consisted of 8 blocks of training session and 8 blocks of transfer session. In 5th block of training session, the task was designed for participants to experience change of difficulty during training session so that their accuracy of self-assessment becomes inaccurate. The differences between participants' anticipated scores and real performance scores of 6th block were used as indicators of metacognitive error. Results show that cognitive ability and conscientiousness are not significant predictors of transfer learning performance, but only metacognitive ability positively predicts the performance. The authors concluded that the metacognitive ability is the most important variable in predicting the learning and transfer of learning regardless of task difficulties. Such findings imply the vital role of metacognition in learning.

keywords
Conscientiousness, Cognitive ability, Metacognition, Transfer of learning, 성실성, 인지 능력, 메타인지, 학습의 전이

참고문헌

1.

양애경, 조호제 (2010). 자기주도적 학습과 학업성취도간의 관계. 한국교육논단, 8, 61- 82.

2.

임호찬 (2003). 한국판 레이븐 지능발달검사. 서울: 한국가이던스.

3.

Afflerbach, P. (2000). Verbal reports and protocol analysis. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research. Volume III (pp. 163–179). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

4.

Bennett, L. S. (1994). Sources of information in metamemory: judgments of learning and feelings of knowing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 357-375.

5.

Bier, M. E., Campbell, M., & Crook, A. E. (2010). Developing and demonstrating knowledge: Ability and non-ability determinants of learning and performance. Intelligence, 38, 179-186.

6.

Brown, A. L. (1978). Knowing when, where, and how to remember: A problem of metacognition. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advanced in instructional psychology, Vol. 1 (pp. 77-165). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

7.

Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other mysterious mechanisms. In F. E. Weinert and E. H. Kluwe (Ed.), Metacognition, Motivation, and Understanding (Hillsdal, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum), 65-116.

8.

Bruno, L. (2007). Metacognitive learning strategies: differential development patterns in high school. Metacognition and Learning, 4, 111-123.

9.

Butler, A. C., Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). Correcting a metacognitive error: feedback increases retention of low-confidence correct response. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 918-928.

10.

Chance, P. (1999). Learning and Behavior (4th ed.). Brooks: Cole Publishing Company.

11.

Cooper, L. A., & Podgorny, P. (1976). Mental transformations and visual comparison processes: Effects of complexity and similarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2, 503-514.

12.

Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inven-tory (NEO PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory professional man-ual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

13.

Doane, S. M., Alderton, D. L., Pellegrino, J. W., & Sohn, Y. W. (1993, November). Acquisition and transfer of skilled performance: Are visual discrimination skills stimulus specific? Paper presented at the 34th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Washington, DC.

14.

Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911.

15.

Huws, N., Reddy, P. A., & Talcott, J. B. (2009). The effect of faking on non-cognitive predictors of academic performance in university students. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 476-480.

16.

Keppe, R., & Flier, H. (2010). Using multiple and specific criteria to assess the predictive validity of the Big Five personality factors on academic performance. Journal of Research in Personality, 44, 142-145.

17.

Kornell, N., & Metcalfe, J. (2006). Study efficacy and the region of proximal learning framework. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 609-622.

18.

Kuhn, D. (2000). Metacognitive development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9, 178-181.

19.

Pintrich, P. R., & deGroot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33-40.

20.

Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 26, 113-125.

21.

Thomas, G. (2003). Conceptualization, Conceptualisation, development and validation of an instrument for investigating the metacognitive orientations of science classroom learning environments: The Metacognitive Orientation Learning Environment Scale–Science (MOLES–S). Learning Environment Research, 6, 175–197.

22.

Thomas, A. K., John, B. B., & Stacey, J. D. (2011). Context affects feeling-of-knowing accuracy in younger and older adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 96-108.

23.

Treena, E. R., & Lee, A. T. (2007). Predicting academic achievement with cognitivw ability. Intelligence, 35, 83-92.

24.

Van Bragt, C. A. C., Bakx, A. W. E. A., Bergen, T. C. M., & Croon, M. A. (2011). Looking for students' personal characteristics predicting study outcome. Studies in Higher Education, 61, 59-75.

25.

Veenman, M. V. J., & Spaans, M. A. (2005). Relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills: Age and task differences. Learning and Individual Differences, 15, 159–176.

26.

Veenman, M. J. V., Wilhelm, P., & Beishuizen, J. J. (2004). The relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills from a developmental perspective. Learning and Instruction, 14, 89-109.

27.

White, R. T. (1986). Origins of PEEL. In J. R. Baird and I. J. Mitchell (Eds) Improving the Quality of Teaching and Learning: An Australian Case Study - The PEEL Project (Melbourne: Monash University), 1-7.

28.

Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 51–59.

한국심리학회지: 일반

논문 투고 OA 정책