The art of thinking · 1 · Foundations
Metacognition
Also known as: Thinking about thinking, Metacognitive monitoring, Cognitive monitoring
German: Metakognition
In cognitive psychology, metacognition is knowledge about and regulation of one’s own cognition — judging what one knows, how well one understands something and whether a strategy is working, and adjusting accordingly; the term was established by the developmental psychologist John H. Flavell.
- Cognitive psychology
- Learning
In one sentence
Metacognition is knowing and regulating one’s own thinking: judging what one understands and adjusting how one reads, learns or acts.
Example
A reader who notices “I don’t know which mode the machine is in” and goes back to the mode table is monitoring and controlling comprehension. A page that shows the current state makes that monitoring easier.
What the research shows
Flavell (1979) distinguished metacognitive knowledge (about persons, tasks and strategies), metacognitive experiences (the feeling of not understanding) and the regulation of cognition. Nelson and Narens (1990) modeled metacognition as two levels: an object level that does the task and a meta level that monitors it (judgments of learning, feelings of knowing, confidence) and controls it (rereading, choosing a strategy, stopping).
Evidence status
Metacognitive monitoring is one of the best-studied areas of cognitive psychology. A robust finding is that monitoring is often poorly calibrated: people judge their understanding from cues such as fluency or familiarity, which can mislead — rereading feels effective but tests better. Training metacognitive strategies improves learning in many studies, with effects that depend on domain and age. The concept does not support the idea that people are generally aware of how their thinking works.
How it applies
Instructions support monitoring when readers can check where they are and whether a step worked: result statements, state indicators, checkpoints. The application glossary Applied cognitive psychology for information use covers these design means; writers need the same skill for their own drafts, where fluency of familiar text hides gaps (see the mental model entry for the reader’s side).
External references
- Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
How to read this pool
Entries, context cards and transitional topics
The art of thinking explains ways of thinking — where a method comes from, what it asks of you and how it was adapted later. You meet four kinds of content here, each with its own job:
- Glossary entry
- Defines one concept or method of thinking: its origin, an example and how it relates to neighboring ideas. “X vs. Y” sections set two methods side by side.
- Context card of the art of thinking
- A short, self-contained answer to one question about a way of thinking — its lineage, its steps, its limits. These cards are listed on The art of thinking only.
- Transitional topicBridges both pools
- A context card that bridges both pools: it shows how a way of thinking was adapted into documentation, analysis or quality practice. It sits with the reference context cards and is marked as transitional wherever it appears.
- Reference entry or context card
- Belongs to the Glossary & Norms Space on regulation, norms and engineering. Entries here link to one only where a method is also an established tool of documentation or quality work, such as the five whys or a user’s mental model.