Rethinking Metacognition in L2 Reading: From Self-Reported Strategy Use to Multimethod Measurement

Metacognition has received considerable attention in L2 reading research over the past decades. Much of this research has focused on learners' awareness and reported use of reading strategies, as these processes are central to understanding how readers approach, monitor, and evaluate comprehension. Established self-report instruments such as the Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (MARSI) and the Survey of Reading Strategies (SORS) provide valuable insights into learners' perceived strategy use across global, problem-solving, and support strategies. However, perceived strategy use may not always correspond to strategies enacted during a particular reading task. This conceptual paper therefore examines the limitations of relying primarily on self-report measures and proposes a stage-based multimethod decision framework that combines self-report, verbal, and real-time behavioural evidence before, during, and after L2 reading. The framework specifies the contribution of each evidence source and shows how convergence and divergence across measures can support research interpretation and classroom-based diagnostic assessment. This approach offers a more comprehensive account of metacognition without treating any single measure as a direct representation of strategic behaviour.

Metacognition, Reading Strategies, L2 Reading, Multimethod Measurement, Diagnostic Assessment

1. Alamer, A., & Alsagoafi, A. (2023). Construct validation of the revised Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (MARSI-R) and its relation to learning effort and reading achievement. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 13(1), 125–149. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.31990 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Araujo, J., Gomes, C. M. A., & Jelihovschi, E. G. (2025). Performance-based metacognitive tests versus self-report: What does prediction tell us? Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 38, Article 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41155-025-00337-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 65–116). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Craig, K., Hale, D., Grainger, C., & Stewart, M. E. (2020). Evaluating metacognitive self-reports: Systematic reviews of the value of self-report in metacognitive research. Metacognition and Learning, 15, 155–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09222-y [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Double, K. S. (2025). Survey measures of metacognitive monitoring are often false. Behavior Research Methods, 57, Article 97. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-025-02621-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Eskey, D. E. (2005). Reading in a second language. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 563–580). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2002). Teaching and researching reading. Pearson Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. He, L., Dong, M., & Wang, J. (2023). Are learners aware of their strategy use? Investigating EFL learners’ self-perceived metacognitive awareness of reading strategies with the MARSI-R. English Language Teaching, 16(7), 81–94. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v16n7p81 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Kim, Y., & Choi, M. (2018). Reading strategy use: How exactly do second language learners’ self-reports reflect their actual performance? Linguistic Research, 26(1), 97–117. https://doi.org/10.24303/lakdoi.2018.26.1.97 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Lee, K. R., & Oxford, R. L. (2007). Triangulating think-alouds and questionnaires in reading strategy assessment: An exploratory study. English Teaching, 62(3), 331–356. https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.62.3.200709.331 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Mokhtari, K., Dimitrov, D. M., & Reichard, C. A. (2018). Revising the Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (MARSI) and testing for factorial invariance. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 8(2), 219–246. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2018.8.2.3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249–259. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.249 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Mokhtari, K., & Sheorey, R. (2002). Measuring ESL students’ awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Developmental Education, 25(3), 2–10. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Nilforoushan, S., Rashtchi, M., & Abbasian, G.-R. (2023). Exploring the perceived and real metacognitive reading strategies of Iranian EFL learners: Different text types in focus. SAGE Open, 13(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231164567 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. O’Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Phakiti, A. (2006). Modeling cognitive and metacognitive strategies and their relationships to EFL reading test performance. Melbourne Papers in Language Testing, 11(1), 53–96. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. RAND Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Vettori, G., Casado-Ledesma, L., Tesone, S., Rosi, A., & Tarchi, C. (2024). Key language, cognitive and higher-order skills for L2 reading comprehension of expository texts in English as foreign language students: A systematic review. Reading and Writing, 37, 2481–2519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-023-10479-3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Zhang, L., & Seepho, S. (2013). Metacognitive strategy use and academic reading achievement: Insights from a Chinese context. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 10(1), 70–85. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study