Document Type


Publication Date




Two studies attempt to determine the causes of poor metacomprehension accuracy, and then, in turn, to identify interventions that circumvent these difficulties to support effective comprehension monitoring performance. The first study explored the cues that both at-risk and typical college readers use as a basis for their metacomprehension judgments in the context of a delayed summarization paradigm. Improvement was seen in all readers, but at-risk readers did not reach the same level of metacomprehension accuracy as a sample of typical college readers. Further, while few readers reported using comprehension-related cues, more at-risk readers reported using surface-related cues as the basis for their judgments. To support the use of more predictive cues among the at-risk readers, a second study employed a concept map intervention, which was intended to make situation model-level representations more salient. Concept mapping improved both the comprehension and metacomprehension accuracy of at-risk readers. The results suggest that poor metacomprehension accuracy can result from a failure to use appropriate cues for monitoring judgments, and that especially less-able readers need interventions that direct them to predictive cues for comprehension.

Copyright Statement

This is an electronic version of an article published in Discourse Processes, Volume 47, Issue 4. Discourse Processes is available online at: DOI: 10.1080/01638530902959927