ساخت و اعتباریابی مقیاس فراحافظه برای نوجوانان

نویسندگان
ندا اثنی عشری
مسعود حسینچاری
بهرام جوکار
محبوبه فولادچنگ
محبوبه فولادچنگ
فرهاد خرمایی
دانشگاه شیراز
چکیده
هدف از پژوهش حاضر تدوین و اعتباریابی مقیاس فراحافظه نوجوانان در بافت تحصیلی بود. این پژوهش، ترکیبی از نوع اکتشافی متوالی است که در مرحله کیفی با استفاده از روش همسوسازی داده­های چندگانه مشتمل بر چهارضلع الف) جمع­آوری اطلاعات مبانی نظری و اصول زیربنایی مربوط به فراحافظه بر اساس چارچوب نظری نلسون و نارنز، ب) پژوهش­های انجام شده در حوزه فراحافظه و یادگیری، ج) ارائه تکلیف حافظه­محور و مصاحبه فراحافظه مبنا بر روی دانش­آموزان (33 نفر) و تحلیل آن (ملاک و نشانگر­ها) و د) بهره­گیری از نظرهای متخصصان حوزه شناختی و تربیتی چارچوب نظری اولیه، و سرانجام بر آن اساس مقیاس فراحافظه تدوین و اعتباریابی شد. سپس در مرحله کمی، با استفاده از نمونه 289 نفری (170= دختر و 116=پسر در رده­ی سنی 18-12 سال) روایی و پایایی مقیاس، با به کارگیری روش­های آماری تحلیل عامل اکتشافی و آلفای کرونباخ بررسی و تایید شد. نتایج تحلیل عاملی اکتشافی نشان داد 19 گویه در قالب 4 عامل: قضاوت­های مربوط به یادگیری، قضاوت­های خود اطمینان­بخش، قضاوت­های حس دانستن و قضاوت­های آسان بودن یادگیری مقیاس فراحافظه را تشکیل می­دهند. ضریب آلفای کرونباخ برای هر عامل محاسبه و ضریب پایایی کل مقیاس برابر با 71/0 محاسبه شد. یافته­های پژوهش معرفی ابزاری جهت سنجش فراحافظه گروه سنی نوجوان در بافت تحصیلی است که ابزاری سودمند برای سنجش فراحافظه و به کارگیری در پژوهش­های شناختی و یادگیری است.
کلیدواژه‌ها
فراحافظه
یادگیری
حافظه
قضاوت

عنوان مقاله English

Developing and validation of metamemory scale for adolescents

نویسندگان English

Neda Esnaashari
Masoud HoseinChari
Bahram Jowkar
Mahbobe Fooladchang
Mahbobe Fooladchang
Farhad Khormaei
Shiraz Uinversity
چکیده English

The purpose of this study was developing and validating the metamemory scale for adolescents in the academic context. The study was a mixed method research and benefitted from sequential exploratory type which in qualitative stage using triangulation method (aligning multiple data approach) holding four dimensions of a) collecting literature reviews related to metamemoey based on the theoretical framework of Nelson & Narens, b) researches done in the field of metamemory and learning, c) presentation of memory-based assignments and metamemory based interviews on students (n=33) and analysis them (criteria and markers), & d) utilizing the views of experts in the field of primary theoretical framework and at last based on them, metamemory scale was developed and validated. Then in quantitative stage, using a sample of 289 students (170=girl & 116=boy in the range of 12-18 years old) validity and reliability of the scale were verified by using exploratory factor analysis and Cronbach’s alpha. The results of exploratory factor analysis showed 19 items in the form of 4 factors that create the metamemory scale: Judgments of Learning, Self-Confidence Judgments, Feeling of Knowing Judgments, and Ease of Learning Judgments. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was calculated for each factor and the reliability coefficient of the whole scale was 0/71. Research findings provide a tool for measuring matamemory in adolescent’s age group in academic context that is a useful instrument for measuring metamemory and applying in cognitive and learning researches.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

metamemory
learning
Memory
judgments
Bender, A.R., & Raz, N. (2012). Age-related differences in recognition memory for items and associations: Contribution of individual differences in working memory and metamemory. Psychology and Aging, 27(3), 691–700.
Bjork, R.A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417–444.
Blake, A.B., Castel, A.D. (2018). On belief and fluency in the construction of judgments of learning: assessing and altering the direct effects of belief. Acta Psychologica, 186, 27-38.
Campelo, G., Zortea, M., Saraiva, R., Machado, W., Sbicigo, J.B., Segabinazi, J.D., Gastal, C., Mendoca de Castilho, G., & Fumagalli Salles, J. (2016). A short version of the questionnaire of metamemory in adulthood (MIA) in Portuguese. Psicologia: Reflexao e Critica, 29, 37-45.
Castel, A.D., Mcgillivary, S., & Friedman, M.C. (2012). Metamemory and memory efficiency in older adults: learning about the benefits of priority processing and value-directed remembering. In M. Naveh-Benjamin & N. Ohta (Eds.), Perspectives on memory and aging. New York: Psychology Press.
Chua, E.F., & Bliss-Moreau, E. (2016). Knowing your heart and your mind: The relationships between metamemory and interoception. Consciousness and Cognition, 45, 146-158.
Cottini, M., Basso, D., & Palladino, P. (2018). The role of declarative and procedural metamemory in event-based prospective memory in school-aged children. Journal of experimental child psychology, 166, 17-33.
Creswell, J.W., & Plano Clark, V.L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, C.A: Sage Publications.
Dixon, R.A, & Hultsch, D.F. (1983a). Metamemory and memory for text relationships in adulthood: A cross-validation study. Journal of Gerontology, 38, 689–694.
Dixon, R.A., & Hultsch, D.F. (1983b). Structure and development of metamemory in adulthood. Journal of Gerontology, 38, 682–688.
Dunlosky, J., & Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognition. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage Publications.
Fabrigar, L.R., Wegener, D.T., MacCallum, R.C., & Strahan, E.J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272-299.
Flavell, J.H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.
Flavell, J.H., & Wellman, H.M. (1967). Development of memory and cognition. NewJercy: Lawrence Elbaum Associates, Hillsdale.
Fort, I., Adoul, L., Holl, D., Kaddour, J., & Gana, K. (2004). Psychometric properties of the rench version of the multifactorial memory questionnaire for adults and the elderly. Canadian Journal on Aging, 23(4), 347-357.
Gilewski, M. J., Zelinski, E. M., & Schaie, K. W. (1990). The Memory Functioning Questionnaire for assessment of memory complaints in adulthood and old age. Psychology and Aging, 5, 482–490.
Karably, K., & Zabrucky, M. (2009). Children’s metamemory: a review of the literature and implications for the classroom. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 2(1), 32-52.
Koriat, A., Ma’ayan, H., & Nussinson, R. (2006). The intricate relationships between monitoring and control in metacognition: lessons for the cause and effect relation between subjective experience and behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 135(1), 36-69.
Krejcie, R.V., Morgan, D.W., (1970). Determining Sample Size for Research Activities, Educational and Psychological Measurement.
Liu, Y., Su. Y., Xu, G., & Pei, M. (2018). When do you what you know? The emergence of memory monitoring. Journal of experimental child psychology, 166, 34-48.
Magno, C. (2008). Reading strategy, amount of writing, metacognition, metamemory and apprehension as predictors of English written performance. Asian EFL Journal, 29, 15-48.
Metcalfe, J., & Dunlosky, J. (2008). Metamemory-learning and memory: A comprehensive refrence. III (Ed.), Oxford: Elsevier.
Nelson, T.O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. New York: Academic Press.
Palmer, E.C., David, A.S., & Fleming, S.M. (2014). Effects of age on metacognitive efficiency. Consciousness and Cognition, 28, 151–160.
Schneider, W., & Lockl, K. (2002). Applied metacognition. Cambridge: university press.
Schraw, G. (2008). A conceptual analysis of five measures of metacognitive monitoring. Metacognition and Learning, 4(1), 33–45.
Schraw, G., & Gutierrez, A.P. (2015). Metacognitive strategy instruction that highlights the role of monitoring and control processes. Metacognition: Fundaments, Applications, and Trends, 76, 3–16.
Schwartz, B.L., & Efklides, A. (2012). Metamemory and memory efficiency: implications for student learning. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1, 145-151.
Schwartz, B.L., & Metcalfe, J. (2011). Tip of the tongue (TOT) states: retrieval, behavior and experience. Memory & Cognition, 39, 737-749.
Schwartz, B.L., & Metcalfe, J. (2017). Metamemory: an update of critical findings. Learning and memory: a comprehensive reference, 2nd Ed, United States: Academic Press.
Troyer, A.K., & Rich, J.B. (2002). Psychometric properties of a new metamemory questionnaire for older adults. Journal of Gerontology: psychological sciences, 57B (1), 19-27.
Watier, N. (2012). Metacognition aspects of face identification. A dissertation for the Ph.D. degree in Psychology, Faculty of social sciences, University of Ottawa.
Witherby, A.M., & Tauber, S.K. (2017). The influence of judgments of learning on long-term learning and short-term performance. Journal of applied research in memory and cognition, 6(4), 496-503.
Yassuda, M.S., Lasca, V.B., & Neri, A.L. (2005). Meta-memória e auto-eficácia: Um estudo de validação de instrumentos de pesquisa sobre memória e envelhecimento. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 18(1), 78–90.
Zortea, M., Jou, G.I., & Salles, J.F. (2014). Tarefa experimental de metamemória para avaliar monitoramento e controle de memória. Psico USF, 19(2), 329–344.