Students' fallacies in predicting test outcomes
https://doi.org/10.55959/MSU0130-0105-6-60-2-14
Abstract
Tests are an integral part of any learning process. If students do not have sufficient information on tests’ content, they may have erroneous expectations and choose a suboptimal educational strategy, which leads both to a decrease in an overall level of knowledge and academic success, and a decrease in students' motivation to make efforts in future. Our objective is to identify the factors that shape expected and actual test scores and determine the differences between them. The data were collected through a survey of students of the Faculty of Economics of Lomonosov Moscow State University in the course “Theory of Finance” with a regression analysis as a modeling method. Students incorrectly assess their knowledge of the course, which leads to incorrect expectations. When forming expected grades for the tests, respondents focus on past achievements in other academic subjects, but no correlation between this factor and actual grades was found. At the same time, students do not consider past mistakes (the difference between actual and expected scores for the first paper) when forming expected scores for the next test.
About the Authors
E. A. Siniakova
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Moscow
A. G. Mirzoyan
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Moscow
References
1. Atkinson, J. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior. Psychological Review, 64(6), 359–372. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043445
2. Brunnermeier, M. K., & Parker, J. A. (2005). Optimal expectations. American Economic Review, 95(4), 1092–1118. https://doi.org/10.1257/0002828054825493
3. Eil, D., & Rao, J. M. (2011). The good news-bad news eff ect: Asymmetric processing of objective information about yourself. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 3(2), 114–138. https://doi.org/10.1257/mic.3.2.114
4. Foster, N. L., Was, C. A., Dunlosky, J., & Isaacson, R. M. (2017). Even after thirteen class exams, students are still overconfi dent: The role of memory for past exam performance in student predictions. Metacognition and Learning, 12(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-016-9158-6
5. Glenberg, A. M., Wilkinson, A. C., & Epstein, W. (1982). The illusion of knowing: Failure in the self-assessment of comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 10(6), 597–602. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202442
6. Hacker, D. J., Bol, L., Horgan, D. D., & Rakow, E. A. (2000). Test prediction and performance in a classroom context. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 160–170. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.1.160
7. Jansen, R. A., Raff erty, A. N., & Griffi ths, T. L. (2021). A rational model of the DunningKruger eff ect supports insensitivity to evidence in low performers. Nature Human Behaviour, 5(6), 756–767. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01057-0
8. Koszegi, B. (2006). Ego utility, overconfi dence, and task choice. Journal of the European Economic Association, 4(4), 673–707. https://doi.org/10.1162/JEEA.2006.4.4.673
9. Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How diffi culties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to infl ated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121–1134. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1121
10. Mezulis, A. H., Abramson, L. Y., Hyde, J. S., & Hankin, B. L. (2004). Is there a universal positivity bias in attributions? A meta-analytic review of individual, developmental, and cultural diff erences in the self-serving attributional bias. Psychological Bulletin, 130(5), 711–747. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.5.711
11. Miller, T. M., & Geraci, L. (2011). Training metacognition in the classroom: The infl uence of incentives and feedback on exam predictions. Metacognition and Learning, 6(3), 303–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-011-9083-7
12. Möbius, M. M., Niederle, M., Niehaus, P., & Rosenblat, T. S. (2022). Managing selfconfi dence: Theory and experimental evidence. Management Science, 68(11), 7793–7814. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2021.4294
13. Muenks, K., Wigfi eld, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2018). I can do this! The development and calibration of children’s expectations for success and competence beliefs. Developmental Review, 48, 24–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2018.04.001
14. Putwain, D. W., Nicholson, L. J., Pekrun, R., Becker, S., & Symes, W. (2019). Expectancy of success, attainment value, engagement, and achievement: A moderated mediation analysis. Learning and Instruction, 60, 117–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.11.005
15. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton University Press.
16. Rury, D., & Carrell, S. E. (2023). Knowing what it takes: The eff ect of information about returns to studying on study eff ort and achievement. Economics of Education Review, 94, 102400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2023.102400
17. Serra, M. J., & DeMarree, K. G. (2016). Unskilled and unaware in the classroom: College students’ desired grades predict their biased grade predictions. Memory and Cognition, 44(7), 1127–1137. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-016-0624-9
18. Siniakova, E. A., & Mirzoyan, A. G. (2024). Feedback spillovers across unrelated tasks. Educational Studies Moscow, 2(3), 176–194. https://doi.org/10.17323/VO-2024-17644
19. Svanum, S., & Bigatti, S. (2006). Grade expectations: Informed or uninformed optimism, or both? Teaching of Psychology, 33(1), 14–18. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top3301_4
20. Svenson, O. (1981). Are we all less risky and more skillful than our fellow drivers? Acta Psychologica, 47(2), 143–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(81)90005-6
21. Wigfi eld, A., Rosenzweig, E. Q., & Eccles, J. S. (2017). Achievement values: Interactions, interventions, and future directions. In A. J. Elliot, C. S. Dweck, & D. S. Yeager (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation: Theory and application (2nd ed., p. 116–134). Guilford Press.
Supplementary files
Review
For citations:
Siniakova E.A., Mirzoyan A.G. Students' fallacies in predicting test outcomes. Moscow University Economics Bulletin. 2025;(2):309-331. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.55959/MSU0130-0105-6-60-2-14
Views:
31
Email this article 