The Metacognitive Awareness Listening Questionnaire: Development and Validation
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
- Candidate categories
- Science and technology studies
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: Not applicableConsensus signal: none
- Genre
- Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: Empirical
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.823
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 0.999
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
- Teacher spread
- 0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline· verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it
Abstract
This article describes the development and validation of a listening questionnaire designed to assess second language (L2) listeners' metacognitive awareness and perceived use of strategies while listening to oral texts. The process of instrument development and validation is described, along with a review of the relevant literature related to metacognition and learners' regulation of listening comprehension strategies. An exploratory factor analysis of the responses of a large sample ( N = 966) of language learners and a subsequent confirmatory factor analysis with another large but different sample ( N = 512) resulted in a 21‐item instrument with robust psychometric properties. Five distinct factors emerged: problem‐solving, planning and evaluation, mental translation, person knowledge, and directed attention. The reliability and factorial validity of the instrument are presented along with evidence for a statistically significant relationship between student response on the instrument and L2 listening comprehension success. The article concludes with a discussion of the potential uses of the Metacognitive Awareness Listening Questionnaire (MALQ).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
The record
- Venue
- Language Learning
- Topic
- EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Field
- Arts and Humanities
- Canadian institutions
- University of Ottawa
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- PsychologyActive listeningMetacognitionConfirmatory factor analysisExploratory factor analysisListening comprehensionReliability (semiconductor)Sample (material)ComprehensionPsychometricsCognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologyStructural equation modelingCognitionLinguisticsCommunication
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes