The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Metacognition and confidence: comparing math to other academic subjects
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00742 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shanna Erickson, Evan Heit |
| Abstract |
Two studies addressed student metacognition in math, measuring confidence accuracy about math performance. Underconfidence would be expected in light of pervasive math anxiety. However, one might alternatively expect overconfidence based on previous results showing overconfidence in other subject domains. Metacognitive judgments and performance were assessed for biology, literature, and mathematics tests. In Study 1, high school students took three different tests and provided estimates of their performance both before and after taking each test. In Study 2, undergraduates similarly took three shortened SAT II Subject Tests. Students were overconfident in predicting math performance, indeed showing greater overconfidence compared to other academic subjects. It appears that both overconfidence and anxiety can adversely affect metacognitive ability and can lead to math avoidance. The results have implications for educational practice and other environments that require extensive use of math. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 126 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 26 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 15% |
| Lecturer | 10 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 6% |
| Researcher | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 26 | 20% |
| Unknown | 30 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 38 | 30% |
| Mathematics | 20 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 18 | 14% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 13 | 10% |
| Unknown | 34 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 August 2016.
All research outputs
#3,170,739
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#5,903
of 31,442 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,796
of 269,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#125
of 534 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,442 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 269,303 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 534 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.