Accurate monitoring of performance in problem-solving tasks is an important prerequisite for students’ future academic success. A wide variety of interventions aiming to enhance students’ monitoring accuracy have been developed, but their effectiveness is not apparent from the individual studies in which they have been examined. This meta-analysis classified these interventions in terms of how they target students’ monitoring and investigated their relative effectiveness to improve monitoring accuracy in problem-solving tasks. Findings across the 35 included studies indicated that all interventions combined have a small positive effect on students’ monitoring accuracy (g = 0.25). Intervention type moderated the findings. Interventions on the whole task, metacognitive knowledge, and external standards improved monitoring accuracy. On the other hand, interventions targeting the timing of metacognitive judgment negatively impacted monitoring accuracy and significantly differed from all other interventions. Exploratory moderator analyses of study features indicated that secondary school students benefited least from the interventions compared to primary school students and adults, laboratory studies showed larger effects than classroom studies, and interventions were more effective for retrospective confidence judgments than for judgments of learning. For educational practice, interventions targeting the whole task, metacognitive knowledge, and external standards are recommended, while reconsideration and possibly discontinuation of timing interventions is needed.

准确监控解决问题任务的表现是学生未来学业成功的重要前提。人们已经开发了多种旨在提高学生监测准确性的干预措施，但从对其进行检验的个别研究来看，其有效性并不明显。这项荟萃分析根据如何针对学生的监控对这些干预措施进行了分类，并调查了它们在提高解决问题任务中的监控准确性方面的相对有效性。 35 项纳入研究的结果表明，所有干预措施的结合对学生的监测准确性产生了微小的积极影响 ( g = 0.25)。干预类型调节了研究结果。对整个任务、元认知知识和外部标准的干预提高了监测准确性。另一方面，针对元认知判断时间的干预措施会对监测准确性产生负面影响，并且与所有其他干预措施显着不同。对研究特征的探索性调节分析表明，与小学生和成人相比，中学生从干预措施中获益最少，实验室研究比课堂研究显示出更大的效果，干预措施对回顾性信心判断比对学习判断更有效。对于教育实践，建议针对整个任务、元认知知识和外部标准进行干预，同时需要重新考虑甚至可能停止时机干预。