The Double-Edged Interactions of Prompts and Self-efficacy

11Citations
Citations of this article
63Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

By activating self-regulation processes, prompts affect strategy use and learning outcomes. This study investigates the effects of cognitive and metacognitive prompts on strategy use and learning outcomes. Since enactive self-regulation processes represent the basis for self-efficacy judgements, we also investigated the effects of cognitive and metacognitive prompts on the development of learners’ self-efficacy. Alternatively, based on the concept of aptitude-treatment interactions, it is proposed that learners’ self-efficacy moderates the effects of prompts on learners’ self-reported online strategy use and their learning outcomes. While learning with hypermedia, N = 70 students either received cognitive and metacognitive prompts or learned without prompts. Self-efficacy was measured before, during, and directly after learning. Learning outcomes were assessed after learning. Strategy use was assessed via self-report and the quality of learning strategies in learners’ notes. Prompting had no effect on self-reported cognitive and metacognitive online strategy use, the quality of learning strategies, and learning outcomes but increased learners’ self-efficacy within the experimental group. Following the theoretical argumentation of aptitude-treatment interactions, moderation analyses indicated that the effect of prompts on learning outcomes was dependent on learners’ self-efficacy during learning. Thus, learners perceived self-efficacy during learning influenced the effectiveness of the prompts. Further research should investigate the interrelations between cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational factors to better understand how self-regulation can effectively be fostered in hypermedia environments.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gentner, N., & Seufert, T. (2020). The Double-Edged Interactions of Prompts and Self-efficacy. Metacognition and Learning, 15(2), 261–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09227-7

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free