STUDY CHOICE WITH DIFFICULT-TO-READ TEXT

Abstract

Results from this experimental study indicate that naïve theories of intelligence do not play a significant role in the formation of students’ judgments of learning (JOL) or students’ study choices when reading text that is difficult to process. Students’ JOL tended to be fairly accurate indicators of performance on a comprehension assessment, but these judgments were not used as a basis for students’ study choices. The evidence from this study suggests that students’ self-efficacy beliefs in reading may serve as a basis for such choices.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interests was reported by the author.