IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/geronb/v76y2021i4p732-740..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Well Do You Think You Summarize? Metacomprehension Accuracy in Younger and Older Adults

Author

Listed:
  • Erika K Fulton
  • Angela Gutchess

Abstract

ObjectivesMetacomprehension monitoring accuracy in older age may be underestimated because of how it has been measured. Metacomprehension in the present study was uniquely measured by comparing summary quality to summary quality judgments. The effect of age on this accuracy was assessed and results were compared to those measured with the typical approach. The moderation of age effects by reading goal was also assessed but was an exploratory objective.1MethodYounger adults (141) and older adults (138) read and orally summarized six expository texts. Participants were randomly assigned to a reading goal condition, with half of each age group summarizing for a professor/boss and half summarizing for an acquaintance. Participants made judgments about the quality of their summaries before and after summarizing, took a multiple-choice test of their comprehension, and made judgments about the accuracy of their answers.ResultsAge deficits in metacomprehension were generally smaller when measured with the novel approach and age differences were generally larger for the professor/boss condition than for the acquaintance condition.DiscussionThe novel approach to measuring metacomprehension monitoring accuracy provides more optimism for aging than typical approaches, discussed in relation to age-related changes in language processing preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Erika K Fulton & Angela Gutchess, 2021. "How Well Do You Think You Summarize? Metacomprehension Accuracy in Younger and Older Adults," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 76(4), pages 732-740.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:76:y:2021:i:4:p:732-740.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/geronb/gbz142
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:76:y:2021:i:4:p:732-740.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.