Metacognition and self-control: An integrative framework.

Abstract

Self-control describes the processes by which individuals control their habits, desires, and impulses in the service of long-term goals. Research has identified important components of self-control and proposed theoretical frameworks integrating these components (e.g., Inzlicht et al., 2021; Kotabe & Hofmann, 2015). In our perspective, these frameworks, however, do not yet fully incorporate important metacognitive aspects of self-control. We therefore introduce a framework explicating the role of metacognition for self-control. This framework extends existing frameworks, primarily from the domains of self-regulated learning and problem-solving (e.g., Schraw & Moshman, 1995; Zimmerman, 2000), and integrates past and contemporary research and theorizing on self-control that involves aspects of metacognition. It considers two groups of metacognitive components, namely, (a) individual metacognitive characteristics, that is a person’s declarative, procedural, and conditional metacognitive knowledge about self-control, as well as their self-awareness (or metacognitive awareness), and (b) metacognitive regulatory processes that unfold before a self-control conflict (forethought and prevention), when a self-control conflict is identified, during a self-control conflict (regulation and monitoring), and after a self-control conflict (reflection and evaluation). The proposed framework integrates existing research and will be useful for highlighting new directions for research on the role of metacognition for self-control success and failure.

The context-sensitive use of task enrichment to promote self-control: The role of metacognition and trait self-control.

“…(c) Are people with higher levels of trait self-control or higher levels of metacognition in self-control more likely to show what we refer to as a context-sensitive use of task enrichment, which involves being more likely to use it for tasks low as opposed to tasks high in cognitive load (Studies 1 and 2)? We focused on these specific individual difference variables because theory and empirical evidence suggests that both are important for a context-sensitive and flexible use of self-regulatory strategies (e.g., Bürgler & Hennecke, 2023; Bürgler et al, 2021; Fujita et al, 2020; Hennecke & Bürgler, 2023; Wenzel, Bürgler, Rowland, & Hennecke, 2023).…”

“…For metacognitive regulation, we found no significant interactions. Metacognitive regulation, given that it encompasses monitoring and evaluation of ones self-control attempts, is probably a necessary precondition to generate metacognitive knowledge about one’s self-control (Hennecke & Bürgler, 2023). It may, however, not—without also translating into metacognitive knowledge—directly affect context-sensitive strategy use itself.…”

“…First and foremost, context-sensitivity is a key aspect of the theoretical conception of metacognitive knowledge of self-control, which involves knowing which strategy to use for which situation (e.g., Hennecke & Bürgler, 2023). Second, metacognitive regulation involves planning for self-control, which involves considering various strategies for the resolution of upcoming conflicts.…”

The metamotivation approach: Insights into the regulation of motivation and beyond

“…Thus, motivational states have a directive (guide preferences) and dynamic function (a readiness to act in a certain way). Although one could conceptualize metamotivation as a subset of metacognition research (if one considers motivational processes to be part of a broader cognitive system; e.g., Bϋrgler et al., 2021; Hennecke & Bürgler, 2023; Mischel & Mischel, 1983), establishing metamotivation as a separate line of research affords novel insights that advance motivation and self‐regulation research and highlight new meta‐level phenomena.…”

Metacognition and polyregulation in daily self‐control conflicts

“…While the target of one's knowledge differs as opposed to metacognitive knowledge in educational psychology (from self‐regulated learning to self‐control), our concept and operationalization of metacognitive knowledge is still closely related to how it is described in self‐regulated learning, for example, by including aspects related to one's declarative, conditional, and procedural knowledge (e.g., Schraw & Moshman, 1995). Knowing about these aspects of their own self‐control could, in turn, be associated with better self‐control because it helps the person to anticipate the demands of a current conflict and to prepare for them, for example, by planning the use of self‐regulatory strategies to deal with it (see also Hennecke & Bürgler, 2022).…”