Relationship between Demographic Factors and Metacognition in Digital

Library Interaction

Heesop Kim

, Aluko Ademola

and Yumi Kim

Department of Library and Information Science, Kyungpook National University, Daehak-ro 80, Daegu, South Korea

Keywords:

Metacognition Awareness, Digital Library Interaction, Information Searching, University Students, Demo-

graphic Factors.

Abstract:

This paper aims to investigate the relationships between the university students’ demographic factors and their

metacognition in digital library interaction. To achieve the objectives of this study, the demographic factors

were divided into six variables (i.e., gender, age, qualiﬁcation, academic backgrounds, searching skills, and

experience with the digital library) and the metacognition was classiﬁed into nine variables (i.e., schema-

training, planning, monitoring, evaluation, transfer, memory, comprehension, task, technology). A total of

112 students participated in the online questionnaire. The collected data were analyzed using SPSS version

26, and a signiﬁcant correlation between demographic elements and metacognition was found in digital library

interactions. Interestingly, the experience with digital libraries has shown the strongest factor to be considered

as the most important variable in the design of digital library interactions.

1 INTRODUCTION

Over the years, the storage and preservation of phys-

ical materials and notable books have been the hall-

mark of a conventional library. Users would have to

go to the library to learn and search for detailed infor-

mation. This trend gradually changed with the intro-

duction of computers in the processing and searching

of information some decades ago. The rapid devel-

opment of Information Communication and Technol-

ogy (ICT) has brought about unprecedented changes.

Present developments in ICT have brought positive

change to how we store, generate, access, and use in-

formation (Chowdhury and Chowdhury, 2003). Due

to the role of ICT, libraries are undergoing fundamen-

tal changes from the traditional library to the dig-

ital library. Digital library searches become faster

than traditional libraries and provide easy access, fast-

tracking, and many electronic resources, although one

can’t neglect the feel of holding books which means

we can’t denigrate the importance of traditional li-

braries. (Case, 2002) describes information searching

as a deliberate endeavor to obtain information to elim-

inate a deﬁciency of knowledge or meet a knowledge

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4642-4445

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4314-2143

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1765-1999

demand. However, due to the signiﬁcant changes

in the libraries, studies show that during informa-

tion searching in the digital library, users experience

less optimal search results or suffer cognitive over-

head. This is due to a lack of information tailored to

the users’ interests, preferences, needs, and context.

For instance, users in traditional libraries can learn

how to ﬁnd information from librarians if assistance

is needed.

However, that may not be the case in the modern

digital library, where information professionals’ help

is not always available, and users are left alone to ac-

cess, search, and use information. Generally, when

students looking for information, they prefer to in-

formation, students prefer to look at online sources

rather than practice in a methodical and organized

manner, making learning information sources in the

digital library difﬁcult. In this regard, one could argue

that self-knowledge may drive successful information

searching in the digital library environment with the

help of ”metacognition.” The term metacognition is

most commonly connected with (Flavell, 1976), who

is credited as being the ﬁrst scholar to use the no-

tion of metacognition, a term he coined from the word

”metamemory” and ﬁrst used in his early 1970s publi-

cations. According to (Flavell, 1979), metacognition

is the act of a thinker reﬂecting on their mental pro-

cess. It involves people comprehending both them-

Kim, H., Ademola, A. and Kim, Y.

Relationship between Demographic Factors and Metacognition in Digital Library Interaction.

DOI: 10.5220/0011371000003323

In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computer-Human Interaction Research and Applications (CHIRA 2022), pages 89-96

ISBN: 978-989-758-609-5; ISSN: 2184-3244

selves and the nature of the activity and understanding

the speciﬁcation of the task.

Metacognition is deﬁned by (Swanson, 1990)

as an individual awareness of their ability to mon-

itor, regulate and manage their learning activities.

Metacognition refers to higher-level planning for han-

dling a learning activity and mechanisms for observ-

ing and evaluating comprehension. At times, indi-

viduals utilize the expression ”going meta” when dis-

cussing metacognition, alluding to the interaction of

reviewing a sort of ﬂashback to see what you are

doing, as though you were another person noticing

it. Sternberg refers to these executive processes as

meta-components in his triarchic theory of intelli-

gence (Sternberg, 1984). According to (Sternberg,

1986) meta-components are in charge of ”determin-

ing how to perform a certain task or set of activities,

and then ensuring that the job or set of tasks is com-

pleted correctly and the ability to organize cognitive

resources effectively, such as selecting how and when

a task should be completed is centered to intelligence.

Metacognition is a fundamental human trait (Muhali,

2018) that is deﬁned as thinking about thinking by go-

ing through a process of review (McCormick, 2003).

Having metacognition awareness assists individ-

uals in taking a more active role in planning, ana-

lyzing, evaluating, and monitoring their learning pro-

cesses (Akyol and Garrison, 2011). Individuals’

metacognition awareness is assumed to play an es-

sential part in the online information searching pro-

cess by structuring the searching process, monitor-

ing, and assessing much as it is in the learning pro-

cess. Resources on the relationship between metacog-

nition and the search process and its applications are

needed (Bowler, 2009). So much research has been

done in the academic ﬁeld, but much research has not

been done in the digital library interaction regarding

metacognitive skills.

This research examines the relationship between

demographic factors and metacognition in digital li-

brary interaction. The study conducted for this pur-

pose attempts to ﬁnd answers to the following ques-

tions below:

(a) Is there a signiﬁcant relationship between demo-

graphic factors and metacognition when interact-

ing with digital libraries?

(b) What metacognitive skills do students have when

interacting with digital libraries?

2 RELATED WORK

Through the reviewing the previous research, we un-

derstood how various techniques of analysis have spe-

ciﬁc strengths and weaknesses. (Gorrell et al., 2009)

conducted a research on metacognitively aware IR

systems. They classiﬁed metacognitive components

into ﬁve categories: schema-training, planning, mon-

itoring, evaluation, and transfer. They used metacog-

nition information Likert-based knowledge generator,

so called MILK, to offer the coverage of the sub-

areas in the taxonomy. They found that metacognitive

uses vary greatly depending on gender, age, and aca-

demic discipline and that older adults, in particular,

use metacognitive skills more than younger adults.

(Madden et al., 2012) revealed whether the appli-

cation of user evaluation standards provides Metacog-

nitive evidence for web reliability, a total of 48 grad-

uate students from various disciplines participated in

the study. It was observed that some students encoun-

tered some difﬁculties because of an overly simplis-

tic approach to assessing sites. The students were

given different evaluation criteria such as websites

(name, description, appearance, references) and con-

tents such as authorship, quality of writing, evidence

of research, and contacts. According to the ﬁnd-

ings, some participants reported dissatisfaction with

the lack of information about the author’s identity. It

was also noted that the students in the study appeared

to have received little formal assistance on the eval-

uation, which provides the most direct indication of

metacognition behavior, according to (Bonds et al.,

1992), will not only hold information in ways that

vary depending on the task. In this study, some vol-

unteers engaged in such conduct.

(Cadamuro et al., 2019) investigated the rela-

tionship between metacognition and information and

communication technology (ICT) in undergraduate

students. Metacognitive reﬂection during an on-

line course was found to build advanced epistemic

agency in students and increase decision-making

skills through metacognitive tips in the e-learning en-

vironment. Another observation during the research

is that metacognition self-regulation and organiza-

tion predicted students’ performance and information

searching behavior. The ICT and Metacognition are

likely in a bi-directional relationship. On the other

hand, working in technology-mediated contexts sup-

ports the development of metacognitive skills, leading

to better learning outcomes. However, metacognitive

skills are necessary to take advantage of web-based

training. The use of metacognitive skills In ICT has

contributed to creating powerful learning and infor-

mation search.

Another previous research is the think-aloud pro-

cedure focusing on comparing the use of these strate-

gies by people with different levels of critical think-

ing in searching behavior; participants were asked to

CHIRA 2022 - 6th International Conference on Computer-Human Interaction Research and Applications

think aloud everything they thought of when complet-

ing the task that attracted favorable attention. (Erics-

son and Simon, 1984) argue that it reﬂects the think-

ing process more directly than other oral reports that

require participants to express their ideas in words

during the task. It is also considered to be a straight-

forward method to gain insight into human knowl-

edge and techniques of problem-solving,” similarly

to (Crain-Thoreson et al., 1997). The study exam-

ines think-aloud procedures to check the reading com-

prehension process and found that only the conver-

sion response represents after modifying the coding

scheme. The variance in comprehension score ac-

counted for by the usage of comprehension strategy

increased from 20% to 40% after adjusting the cod-

ing system to include only transformed responses that

demonstrated active and correct integration of pas-

sage content.

(Reiso

glu et al., 2020) analyzed 20 university stu-

dents on online information searching and metacog-

nitive abilities during argumentation activities, focus-

ing on three phenomena: argumentation activities,

metacognitive skills, and the link between them. By

examining screen recordings and the online informa-

tion searching strategy inventory (OISSI) created by

(Tsai, 2009), different results were obtained in terms

of metacognition awareness and online information

searching methods. The ﬁndings of the interviews

demonstrated a link between participants’ online in-

formation searching tactics used in argumentation ac-

tivities and all dimensions of metacognition. Further-

more, the data shows that metacognition skills are fre-

quently linked to multiple sub-dimensions in (Tsai,

2009) framework and might readily encompass a va-

riety of techniques. Again, online argumentation ac-

tivities can be argued to allow for extensive use of

metacognitive abilities in planning, monitoring the in-

formation gathering process, and applying appropri-

ate strategies. According to (van Geel et al., 2015)

metacognition is essential in solving complicated in-

formation problems.

However, given that information search is a

problem-solving process, metacognition has always

been a missing piece in the puzzle to understanding

users better. The current study used a metacognitive

paradigm from educational psychology to illuminate

the research problem. However, further research is

needed to categorize users’ difﬁculties during infor-

mation searching through digital libraries and develop

adequate taxonomy, which are ﬁve core metacogni-

tion skills to address these challenges.

3 METHODOLOGY

This section will present the study design, instrument,

participants, and data analysis information.

3.1 Research Design

The quantitative research approach was employed to

identify the demographic differences in metacogni-

tion in digital library interaction. This strategy was

used to gather data on the subject and contribute to a

more comprehensive understanding.

3.2 Participants

The study was conducted to gather adequate infor-

mation from Kyungpook National University students

(Koreans and international students) and Nigerian

university students. This research tends to employ a

simple random sampling technique in selecting one

hundred and twelve (112) respondents for this re-

search. This includes 20 Knu-Korea students,35 Knu-

International students, and 57 Nigeria university stu-

dents. The bulk of the 112 participants was male

(57%) and female (43%) respectively. The partici-

pant’s ages range from 18 to 43 years above. Partici-

pants have different qualiﬁcations ranging from bach-

elor’s degrees, master’s degrees, doctorate degrees

(Ph.D.), and post-doc.

3.3 Metacognition Components

The existing concept of ﬁve metacognitive skills used

in the study Schema-training, planning, monitoring,

evaluation, and transfer were developed by (Brown,

1975). Schema-training: This involves the devel-

opment of cognitive structures that provides a con-

ceptual framework for comprehension (Gordon and

Braijn, 1985). Planning: This refers to carefully

evaluating the current situation in order to determine

potential causes of action to implement solutions to

achieve results and make efﬁcient use of the time

and resources (Erenler and Cetin, 2019). Monitor-

ing: This is about the person’s awareness of how

she performed in relation to the process that was

planned. (Schraw, 1998) Evaluation: This refers to

how the person evaluates both the organization pro-

cess and the outcomes of her own learning (Schraw

and Moshman, 1995) Transfer: It refers to the pro-

cess of moving one’s skills and knowledge from one

problem-solving scenario to another. The low and

high-road theory on learning transfer, developed by

(Perkins et al., 1992) However, (Wallace and Kup-

perman, 1997), who also explores web searching,

Relationship between Demographic Factors and Metacognition in Digital Library Interaction

Table 1: Metacognition components.

Memory Comprehension Task Technology

Schema-training [S-M] [S-C] [S-Ta] [S-Te]

Planning [P-M] [P-C] [P-Ta] [P-Te]

Monitoring [M-M] [M-C] [M-Ta] [M-Te]

Evaluation [E-M] [E-C] [E-Ta] [E-Te]

Transfer [T-M] [T-C] [T-Ta] [T-Te]

recommends breaking down the rest of the required

skills into two parts task and technology. In addition,

metamemory and meta-comprehension are subareas

of Metacognition (Brown, 1975). All these make it

four elements applied to ﬁve components of the task.

As shown in Table 1, there are twenty subareas.

Based on the subareas of Table 1, a 32-item ques-

tionnaire was developed by the researcher using the

Google forms feature. The questionnaire aims to

cover all the domains outlined in the taxonomy and

explore participants’ perceptions of their usage of se-

lected metacognitive skills while searching on the

web and digital libraries. The measurement used is

a 5-point Likert type scale range and was set out and

scored in the following way 5= Strongly agreed, 4=

Agree, 3=Neutral, 2= Disagree, 1= Strongly disagree.

3.4 Data Analysis

The data collected was coded organized and pro-

cessed by the researcher using the statistical package

for the social sciences (SPSS version 26). Descrip-

tive statistics of frequency count were used to pro-

vide information on the number of males and females

that participated in the research. It was also used to

analyze the age, qualiﬁcation, academic background,

searching skills, and experience with a digital library.

The mean and standard deviation were used to an-

alyze the research question to determine the metacog-

nitive skills possessed when searching through the

digital library. Bivariate correlation was used to an-

alyze the relationships between demographics and

metacognition awareness.

4 RESULTS

The results of descriptive statistical analyses were

used to determine the university student’s metacog-

nitive competence scores. The overall mean score is

( ¯x = 3.62) and the criterion mean is 3.0 on a ﬁve-

point scale of metacognitive skills which was divided

into ﬁve dimensions namely: schema-training, plan-

ning, monitoring, evaluation, and transfer. The group

means for each metacognitive skills dimension was

also calculated. The result revealed that schema train-

ing ( ¯x = 3.48), planning ( ¯x = 3.64), monitoring ( ¯x =

3.63), evaluation ( ¯x = 3.54) and transfer ( ¯x = 3.81).

Full results are listed in Table 3.

Bivariate correlation analyses were conducted to

discover relationships between demographic informa-

tion (gender, age, qualiﬁcation, discipline, searching

skills, and experience with digital library) and scores

for the various metacognitive components. A further

correlation analysis sought relationships between de-

mographic information and metacognition. The ﬁnd-

ing revealed the Pearson correlation analysis which

shows that there is negative signiﬁcant relationship

between gender and task (r = −0.265, p > 0.05) as

well as on schema (r = −0.235, p > 0.05) and plan-

ning (r = −0.256, p > 0.05). It also showed that there

is negative signiﬁcant relationship between age and

comprehensive (r = −0.190, p > 0.05) as well as on

schema (r = −0.198, p > 0.05). Furthermore, there

is negative signiﬁcant relationship between academic

background and comprehensive (r = −0.224, p >

0.05) as well as on planning (r = −0.270, p > 0.05).

Finally, there is negative signiﬁcant relationship be-

tween experience with digital library and memory

(r = −0.249, p > 0.05) as well as on comprehen-

sion (r = −0.199, p > 0.05), task (r = −0.279, p >

0.05), technology (r = −0.234, p > 0.05), schema

(r = −0.395, p > 0.05) and planning (r = −0.242,

p > 0.05).

5 DISCUSSION

Table 2 shows that there is a negative signiﬁcant re-

lationship between task, schema, and planning based

on gender. This implies that males have a strong neg-

ative signiﬁcance in the metacognitive skills in the

main component of schema training p = 0.013 and

planning p = 0.006 and subareas task p = 0.005 than

females to a greater extent. Furthermore, age has a

negative signiﬁcance with older people having bet-

ter metacognition skills in schema training p = 0.037

and comprehension p = 0.045. This implies that older

CHIRA 2022 - 6th International Conference on Computer-Human Interaction Research and Applications

Table 2: Pearson correlation coefﬁcient (Pearson’s r) and p-value between Demographics and Metacognition awareness.

Pearson’s r (p-value)

Gender Age Qualiﬁcation Academic

Background

Searching

Skills

Experience with

digital library

Schema

-0.235

∗

-0.198

∗

-0.021 -0.137 0.143 -0.395

∗∗

( < 0.013) (< 0.037) (< 0.825) (< 0.149) (< 0.133) (< 0.000)

Planning

-0.256

∗∗

-0.112 -0.055 -0.270

∗∗

0.063 -0.242

∗

( < 0.006) (< 0.239) (< 0.563) (< 0.004) (< 0.509) (< 0.010)

Monitoring

-0.032 -0.064 -0.012 -0.172 -0.031 -0.077

( < 0.739) (< 0.501) (< 0.904) (< 0.070) (< 0.744) (< 0.419)

Evaluation

-0.089 -0.076 -0.134 0.169 0.017 -0.139

( < 0.353) (< 0.426) (< 0.159) (< 0.075) (< 0.861) (< 0.143)

Transfer

-0.126 0.076 -0.062 0.044 0.095 -0.149

( < 0.186) (< 0.424) (< 0.515) (< 0.646) (< 0.320) (< 0.116)

Memory

-0.146 -0.074 -0.070 0.064 0.119 -0.249

∗∗

( < 0.125) (< 0.437) (< 0.463) (< 0.506) (< 0.210) (< 0.008)

Comprehension

-0.111 -0.190

∗

-0.080 -0.224

∗

-0.009 -0.199

∗

( < 0.243) (< 0.045) (< 0.404) (< 0.018) (< 0.923) (< 0.036)

Task

-0.265

∗∗

-0.100 -0.040 -0.123 0.110 -0.279

∗∗

( < 0.005) (< 0.296) (< 0.678) (< 0.198) (< 0.248) (< 0.003)

Technology

-0.150 0.004 0.003 -0.033 -0.024 -0.234

∗

( < 0.114) (< 0.967) (< 0.975) (< 0.726) (< 0.798) (< 0.013)

∗

Correlation is signiﬁcant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

∗∗

Correlation is signiﬁcant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

people have metacognitive accuracy for their capacity

and older adults can accurately assess their ability to

selectively remember high-value information. There

is a negative signiﬁcant relationship between the main

component of planning p = 0.004 and sub-areas com-

prehension p = 0.010 based on the academic back-

ground which indicates that information technology

students possessed high metacognition skills which

comprise the highest percentage of students that par-

ticipated in the research. Experience with the digital

library is very much inﬂuenced and an important fac-

tor in both schema training, p = 0.000 planning, p

= 0.010 memory, p = 0.008 comprehension p = 0.036

task, p = 0.033 technology p = 0.013. Therefore, gen-

der, age, academic background, and experience with

the digital are compelling factors that determine the

level of the metacognitive skills of the students.

Table 3 shows that University students reported

higher use of metacognition in general, with the high-

est score of ( ¯x = 3.81) in transfer and in most of the

subareas of metacognition skills. Under schema train-

ing majority of the students possessed high metacog-

nitive skills in schema training-memory. This shows

that a higher percentage of university students have a

number of techniques at their disposal to help them

remember what they learned and where they found it.

It was observed that 52% of respondents lack tech-

niques that can help them understand the information

they ﬁnd while using a digital library.

Under planning, it could be concluded that plan-

ning comprehension is signiﬁcantly high, this shows

that the majority of the students possessed skills in

planning to summarize in order to monitor and im-

prove their comprehension. While they lack plan

search task strategies such as verifying how trustwor-

thy the information from digital libraries is from dif-

ferent academic journals. Importantly, a lack of plan-

ning doesn’t necessarily mean an ineffective search.

In other words, the high potential in planning which

in some cases inhibits efﬁcient retrieval.

A higher percentage of students under monitoring

show strong metacognition skills in the monitoring

search task which indicates when using the digital li-

brary for a learning task, they ask themselves ques-

Relationship between Demographic Factors and Metacognition in Digital Library Interaction

Table 3: Types of metacognitive skill.

S/n Types of metacognitive skills ¯x σ

Schema-Training

[S-M] I have techniques that help me remember any information I come across on digital

library.

3.84 0.94

[S-C] I have techniques that help me understand the information I ﬁnd while using digital

library.

3.21 1.19

[S-Ta] I have developed ways of identifying the type of information I need for my learning

tasks while using digital library.

3.33 1.24

[S-Te] I am good at choosing keywords on user interface of digital library to get optimized

feedback.

3.52 1.18

Average mean 3.48 1.14

Planning

[P-M] I plan ways to remember the information I ﬁnd in the digital library. 3.88 0.84

[P-C] I may use the digital library to start a search task to increase my understanding on

a subject area.

3.87 1.02

[P-Ta] I decide in advance exactly what type of information I am looking for on digital

library.

3.17 1.33

[P-Te] I tend to work out my search skills before using a digital library. 3.65 1.02

Average mean 3.64 1.05

Monitoring

[M-M] Sometimes when using the digital library, I am aware that I might for get the

information I ﬁnd.

3.68 1.01

[M-C] Sometimes when using the digital library, I may have misunderstood information

I read earlier in my search.

3.04 1.14

[M-Ta] When using the digital library for a learning task, I ﬁnd myself asking questions

along the lines of: “Is this search providing the type of in formation I need?”.

3.94 0.80

[M-Te] At times I am cautions as I search (e.g. the words I put into the search box) in the

digital library.

3.85 0.91

Average mean 3.63 0.97

Evaluation

[E-M] It is clear to me when I am failing to remember what I learned in the digital library. 3.49 0.93

[E-C] While using the digital libraries I get convinced that the feedback of my search is

valid.

3.18 1.15

[E-Ta] I spend a lot of time judging how well the information I ﬁnd in digital libraries

matches my learning needs.

3.70 1.02

[E-Te] It is usually obvious to me whether I am using a good search strategy on a digital

library or not.

3.80 0.92

Average mean 3.54 1.01

Transfer

[T-M] I use different approaches to recall the information that I learned in other domains

of digital library.

3.77 0.96

[T-C] My experience with different learning tasks has helped me monitor how well I am

understanding what I read in the digital library.

3.79 0.83

[T-Ta] My experience in other areas helps me to work out exactly what type of informa-

tion I need for my learning task in the digital library.

3.99 0.93

[T-Te] The skills I apply when using a digital library are useful in other areas of my

information searching.

3.70 0.94

Average mean 3.81 0.92

Overall mean = 3.62

CHIRA 2022 - 6th International Conference on Computer-Human Interaction Research and Applications

tions along the line if the search provides the type

of information they need. It shows that 74% of the

participants are aware of their progress towards com-

pleting the task and the reliability of the information

they found. But possessed weak metacognition skills

in monitoring comprehension which shows that when

using a digital library they must have misunderstood

information they read in the past when searching.

Under evaluation, it could be concluded that users

possessed strong metacognition skills in evaluation

technology which implies that it is usually obvious to

the majority of university students whether they are

using a good searching strategy in a digital library or

not. It shows that participants critically evaluate their

search method and use of technology and draw con-

clusions about the use. However, they lack evaluation

comprehension skills while using digital libraries they

get convinced if the feedback of their search is valid.

Under transfer, it shows that users possessed a

higher level of metacognition skills in the transfer

search task with 74% of participants who have ex-

perience from other areas helping them to work out

precisely what type of information they need for their

learning task. On the contrary, there is low metacog-

nition awareness in transfer technology which indi-

cates that the use of carrying learning from other tasks

into their use of sources and technology is low.

6 CONCLUSION AND

RECOMMENDATION

This study’s ﬁndings imply that, regarding the issue

with digital libraries, metacognition awareness is es-

sential where it is lacking. Based on the conclusions

of this paper, metacognitive skills were observed from

different components and subareas of the taxonomy.

The result shows that students demonstrated strong

metacognition skills on transfer which is a result

of metacognitive knowledge that helps them to se-

lect previously learned strategies to achieve searching

goals or to deal with problems encountered during the

task. According to (Groteluschen et al., 1990), if the

chosen strategy is effective and searchers believe it

improves learning quality and their speciﬁc strategy

is stronger. The nature of this study cannot be con-

sidered indicative of the entire student body. Given

the fact that there are 122 participants in the study, it

seems reasonable that it doesn’t cover larger numbers

of students with different academic backgrounds. It

is possible to argue that teaching students how to ap-

ply metacognitive methods improves their academic

performance (1988). Students with advanced skills in

metacognition may keep track of their own learning,

express their opinions on it, keep up to speed on their

knowledge, and develop and implement new learn-

ing procedures. Students that effectively use their

metacognitive skills are more aware of their strengths

and weakness and seek to develop their skills further

than other students (Bransford et al., 2000). The re-

sults show improvement in planning which shows that

majority of the students demonstrate the use of imple-

menting metacognitive strategies that require careful

planning and a better understanding of metacognitive

skills should provide students with potential strategies

to use when searching for information in digital li-

braries.

According to (Jones et al., 1995) the greater a

student’s understanding of metacognition, the greater

his or her efﬁciency. In the twenty-ﬁrst century,

metacognition strategies are needed. This will al-

low students to successfully cope with new situa-

tions when searching, and school library media spe-

cialists to capitalize on their skills and gain ac-

cess to a wealth of resources, fostering the develop-

ment of good thinkers who are successfully problem-

solvers, searching skills, and information retrieval ex-

perts. Additionally, students with good metacognitive

skills are better critical thinkers, problem solvers, or

decision-makers than students without metacognitive

skills, and also metacognitive training can increase

students’ self-conﬁdence and personal responsibility

for their own development.

The implication is that metacognition skills help

individuals process and retain information through

self-recognition and reﬂection. Metacognition skills

are essential because they help students understand

their learning process and how they learn effectively,

and it also assists users in learning to control their

searching by deﬁning search goals and tracking their

progress towards them. The taxonomy used in this re-

search to identify the metacognition awareness from

different nationalities can be used for future research

on information searching through a web search. Its

feature can be used not just for digital libraries.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This Research was supported by Kyungpook National

University Research Fund, 2021.

REFERENCES

Akyol, Z. and Garrison, D. R. (2011). Assessing metacog-

nition in an online community of inquiry. The Internet

and higher education, 14(3):183–190.

Relationship between Demographic Factors and Metacognition in Digital Library Interaction

Bonds, C. W., Bonds, L. G., and Peach, W. (1992).

Metacognition: Developing independence in learning.

The clearing house, 66(1):56–59.

Bowler, L. (2009). Adolescent metacognitive knowledge

during the information search process. Proceedings

of the American Society for Information Science and

Technology, 46(1):1–4.

Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., Cocking, R. R., et al. (2000).

How people learn, volume 11. Washington, DC: Na-

tional academy press.

Brown, A. L. (1975). The development of memory: Know-

ing, knowing about knowing, and knowing how to

know. Advances in child development and behavior,

10:103–152.

Cadamuro, A., Bisagno, E., Pecini, C., and Vezzali, L.

(2019). Reﬂecting a. . . “bit”. what relationship be-

tween metacognition and ict? Journal of E-Learning

and Knowledge Society, 15(3):183–195.

Case, D. O. (2002). Looking for information: A survey of

research on information seeking. Needs, and behav-

ior, pages Fourth Edition: 146–48.

Chowdhury, G. G. and Chowdhury, S. (2003). Introduction

to digital libraries. London: Facet publishing.

Crain-Thoreson, C., Lippman, M. Z., and McClendon-

Magnuson, D. (1997). Windows on comprehension:

Reading comprehension processes as revealed by two

think-aloud procedures. Journal of Educational Psy-

chology, 89(4):579.

Erenler, S. and Cetin, P. S. (2019). Utilizing

argument-driven-inquiry to develop pre-service teach-

ers’ metacognitive awareness and writing skills. In-

ternational Journal of Research in Education and Sci-

ence, 5(2):628–638.

Ericsson, K. A. and Simon, H. A. (1984). Protocol analysis:

Verbal reports as data. the MIT Press.

Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem

solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.) The nature of intel-

ligence.

Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitor-

ing: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry.

American psychologist, 34(10):906.

Gordon, C. J. and Braijn, C. (1985). Metacognitive pro-

cesses: Reading and writing narrative discourse. In

In D.L Forrest-Pressley, G.E. Mackinnon, T.G. Waller

(eds.) Instructional Practices: 1-75. Academic press,

pages 1–75. Academic Press.

Gorrell, G., Eaglestone, B., Ford, N., Holdridge, P., and

Madden, A. (2009). Towards “metacognitively aware”

ir systems: an initial user study. Journal of documen-

tation, 65(3) 446-469.

Groteluschen, A. K., Borkowski, J. G., and Hale, C. (1990).

Strategy instruction is often insufﬁcient: Address-

ing the interdependency of executive and attributional

processes. In Intervention research in learning dis-

abilities, pages 81–101. Springer.

Jones, M. G., Farquhar, J. D., and Surry, D. W. (1995). Us-

ing metacognitive theories to design user interfaces

for computer-based learning. Educational Technol-

ogy, 35(4):12–22.

Madden, A. D., Ford, N., Gorrell, G., Eaglestone, B., and

Holdridge, P. (2012). Metacognition and web credi-

bility. The electronic library, 30(5):671–689.

McCormick, C. B. (2003). Metacognition and learning.

Handbook of psychology, 7:79–102.

Muhali, M. (2018). Pengembangan model pembela-

jaran reﬂektif-metakognitif untuk meningkatkan ke-

mampuan metakognisi siswa sma (developement of

reﬂective-metacognitive learning model to improve

high school students’ unpublished ph.d. thesis, univer-

sitas pendidikan mandalika. ).

Perkins, D. N., Salomon, G., et al. (1992). Transfer of learn-

ing. International encyclopedia of education, 2:6452–

6457.

Reiso

glu,

I., Toksoy, S. E., and Erenler, S. (2020). An anal-

ysis of the online information searching strategies and

metacognitive skills exhibited by university students

during argumentation activities. Library & Informa-

tion Science Research, 42(3):101019.

Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive

awareness. Instructional science, 26(1):113–125.

Schraw, G. and Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theo-

ries. Educational psychology review, 7(4):351–371.

Sternberg, R. J. (1984). Toward a triarchic theory of hu-

man intelligence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,

7(2):269–287.

Sternberg, R. J. (1986). Intelligence applied: Understand-

ing and increasing your intellectual skills. Harcourt

Brace Jovanovich, ISBN: 0155414704.

Swanson, H. L. (1990). Inﬂuence of metacognitive knowl-

edge and aptitude on problem-solving. Journal of ed-

ucational psychology, 82(2):306.

Tsai, M.-J. (2009). Online information searching strategy

inventory (oissi): A quick version and a complete ver-

sion. Computers & Education, 53(2):473–483.

van Geel, M., Goemans, A., and Vedder, P. (2015). A meta-

analysis on the relation between peer victimization

and adolescent non-suicidal self-injury. Psychiatry re-

search, 230(2):364–368.

Wallace, R. and Kupperman, J. (1997). On-line search in the

science classroom: Beneﬁts and possibilities. page 31

https://ﬁles.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED407252.pdf.

CHIRA 2022 - 6th International Conference on Computer-Human Interaction Research and Applications