This study examines three core processes in undergraduates' reasoning about four different evidence types (i.e., anecdotal, observational, correlational, and causal). In particular, we examine undergraduates' processes of evidence identification, evaluation, and selection of evidence to include in writing and how these manifest across different…

Higher education institutions are to teach advanced thinking skills that help students process information, make judgments, and justify associated beliefs. Such skills are necessary for reflective judgment according to the reflective judgment model (RJM). The purpose of this study was to explore whether engaging undergraduate students in classroom…

Intensive research attention has focused on developing students' evaluative judgement within the higher education curriculum, but little has addressed how it can be measured. The contextual nature of evaluative judgement makes it difficult to generate an encompassing instrument, highlighting the need for situated measurement tools. Against this…

Divergent thinking involves the ability to find many different and new responses or solutions to open-ended problems. The ability to think divergently has been associated with different cognitive processes, including intuitive and rational thinking styles. However, research has not specifically addressed the extent to which divergent thinking is…

This study examined the role of source credibility in the validation of factual information embedded in short narratives. In a self-paced reading experiment, we tested the assumption that the degree of (im-)plausibility determines the extent that source credibility affects validation during comprehension. We used reading times of target and…

In five experiments, we examined the conditions under which participants remembered true and false information given as feedback. Participants answered general information questions, expressed their confidence in the correctness of their answers, and were given true or false feedback. In all five experiments, participants hyper'corrected' when…

Information literacy lies at the core of lifelong learning. It empowers people in all ages of life to seek, evaluate, use, and create information effectively on their personal, social, occupational, and educational goals. It is a fundamental human right in the digital world and promotes the social inclusion of all nations. The prime focus in this…

One component of hindsight bias is memory distortion. This component is measured with a memory design, in which individuals answer questions, learn the correct answers, and recall their original answers. Hindsight bias occurs when participants' recollections are closer to the correct answers than their original judgments actually were. The present…

This article describes a classroom activity to demonstrate (dis)agreement in personality judgments, using an exercise derived from Watson's research on the accuracy of rating strangers' personalities. On the first day of class, undergraduate students in psychology courses rated their own personality and the personality of a classmate, using items…

A widely held assumption in metamemory is that better, more accurate metamemory monitoring leads to better, more efficacious restudy decisions, reflected in better memory performance--we refer to this causal chain as the "restudy selectivity hypothesis". In 3 sets of experiments, we tested this hypothesis by factorially manipulating…

In this study, we examined the effect of two metacognitive scaffolds on the accuracy of confidence judgments made while diagnosing dermatopathology slides in SlideTutor. Thirty-one (N = 31) first- to fourth-year pathology and dermatology residents were randomly assigned to one of the two scaffolding conditions. The cases used in this study were…

It has been common to use video records of instruction in teacher professional development, but participants have rarely been encouraged to evaluate teachers and students' actions in those records, allegedly because evaluation deters from the development of a professional discourse. In this study, we inspected teachers' online discussions of…

The Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT) argues that the most valid judgments of the creativity are those of the combined opinions of experts in the field. Yet who exactly qualifies as an expert to evaluate a creative product such as a short story? This study examines both novice and expert judgments of student short fiction. Results indicate a…

This study examined undergraduate information technology (IT) students' (N = 122) level of ethical reasoning and decision making at a Midwestern university. The purpose was to determine whether IT students' level of ethical reasoning provided information about the degree of their ethical decision making. The Defining Issues Test-2 (DIT-2) was used…

People can use a variety of different strategies to perform tasks and these strategies all have two characteristics in common. First, they can be evaluated in comparison with either an absolute or a relative standard. Second, they can be used at varying levels of consistency. In the present article, the authors develop a general theory of task…