The influence of the number of correct answers in paragraph of test of knowledge on metacognitive monitoring of test tasks performance

The article presents the results of empirical research of the influence of the number of correct answers in paragraphs of knowledge test on the confidence in the solution of test tasks. Each task of the knowledge test stated the information about how many right answers a subject was supposed to give. The results of the study conducted on the material of the solution of specialized tests by the students of the Philological faculty of Tsiolkovsky KSU suggest that confidence in the correctness of the decision is highest when three right answers were supposed to be chosen by the subject. It was revealed that when the subjects were making the metacognitive monitoring of their performance of the test there was an interaction and confluence of external (type of the task) and internal (self-confidence) factors. These results are discussed from the point of view of usage of knowledge tests in the educational practice.

1. Zvonnikov V. I., Chelyshkova M. B. Sovremennye sredstva otsenivaniia rezul'tatov obucheniia [Modern means of evaluating learning outcomes]. Moscow, Akademiia, 2007, 224 p.
2. Romek V. G. Testy uverennosti v sebe [Tests of self-confidence]. Prakticheskaia psikhodiagnostika i psikhologicheskoe konsul'tirovanie. Rostov-na-Donu, Irbis, 1998, pp. 87–108.
3. Savin E. Iu., Fomin A. E. Kognitivnye i lichnostnye faktory uverennosti v znanii konkretnoi predmetnoi oblasti [Empirical research of sourses of confidence of knowlege at students of high school]. Izvestiia Tul'skogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Gumanitarnye nauki, 2011, no. 3, pp. 396–403.
4. Skotnikova I. G. Problema uverennosti: istoriia i sovremennoe sostoianie [Confidence problem: history and current status]. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal, 2002, vol. 23, no.1, pp. 52–60.
5. Carvalho Filho M. K. de. Confidence judgments in real classroom settings: monitoring performance in different types of tests. International Journal of Psychology, 2009, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 93–108.
6. Hacker D. J., Bol L., Keener M. C. Metacognition in education: A focus on calibration. Handbook of metamemory and memory (eds. J. Dunlosky, R.A. Bjork), New York, Psychology Press, 2008, pp. 429–455.
7. Nelson T., Narrens L. Why investigate metacognition? Metacognition: Knowing About Knowing (eds. J. Metcalfe, A. P. Shimamura), Cambridge M. A., MIT Press, 1996, pp. 1–26.
8. Simon H. A. Invariants of human behavior. Annual review of psychology. 1990, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 1–20.
9. Zohar A., Dori Y. J. Introduction. Metacognition in Science Education: Trends in Current Research

   (Contemporary Trends and Issues in Science Education) (eds. A. Zohar, Y. J. Dori), Spinger, 2012, pp. 1–20.