Relationship Between Cognitive Biases and Reading Comprehension among College Students

With reading comprehension skills continuing to decline globally and locally, understanding the cognitive factors that are associated with it has become increasingly important. This study explored the relationship between cognitive biases and reading comprehension among 62 second-year Bachelor of Secondary Education students at Partido State University-College of Education. Using a descriptive-correlational design, the research aimed to describe the relationship between students’ susceptibility to six cognitive biases—anchoring bias, confirmation bias, cognitive overload bias, the Dunning-Kruger effect, the illusion of truth effect, and the recency effect—and their reading comprehension levels. Data were collected through an expert-validated 5-point Likert scale questionnaire and secondary data from the university’s Reading Center. Statistical analysis revealed that while students demonstrated varying levels of susceptibility to specific cognitive biases, no statistically significant relationship was found between these biases and their reading comprehension levels. These findings suggest that while cognitive biases may influence how students engage with texts, they do not directly predict reading comprehension performance in this sample. The study underscores reading as a complex cognitive task and recommends continued research into other contributing factors, such as metacognitive awareness, language proficiency, and motivation, to better support student literacy. Future studies may consider alternative methods or mixed designs to explore this relationship more comprehensively.

cognitive biases, reading comprehension, metacognition

1. Abdelshaheed, B. S. M. (2019). Using Instructional Scaffolding Strategies to Support Oral Productive Language Skills among English Majors at Majmaah University. Arab World English Journal, 10(2), 88–101. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol10no2.8 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Aggleton, J. (2022). Pictures and picturing: mental imagery whilst reading illustrated novels. Cambridge Journal of Education, 53(1), 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764x.2022.2081669 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Aktaş, N., & Ergül, E. (2023). The relationship between primary school students’ reader self-perception and reading comprehension skills. Anadolu University Journal of Education Faculty, 7(3), 609–627. https://doi.org/10.34056/aujef.1255258 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Barber, B., & Odean, T. (2001). Boys will be boys: Gender, overconfidence, and common stock investment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116, 261–292. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355301556400 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Ben-David I., Graham J., Harvey C. (2013). Managerial miscalibration. Q. J. Econ. 128, 1547–1584. doi: 10.1093/qje/qjt023 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Bettinger, E. & Long, B. (2009). Addressing the Needs of Underprepared Students in Higher Education. The Journal of Human Resources. 44(3):736-771. DOI: 10.3368/jhr.44.3.736 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Bilbao, M. M., Donguila, C. S. & Vasay, M. G. (2016). Level of Reading Comprehension of the Education Students. ARETE, 4(1). https://ejournals.ph/article.php?id=13762 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Blumenthal-Barby, J. S., & Krieger, H. (2015). Cognitive biases and heuristics in medical decision making: A critical review using a systematic search strategy. Medical Decision Making, 35(5), 539–557. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X14547740 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Cabasan, H. (2014). The Reading Comprehension of Freshman Education Students: A Reading Program Design. Chrislaborarcay. https://www.academia.edu/6754983/The_Reading_Comprehension_of_Freshman_Education_Students_A_Reading_Program_Design [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Caccavale. (2020). A guide to attribution bias: What is attribution bias? BE Applied. https://www.beapplied.com/post/attribution-bias-what-is-attribution-bias [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Catarino, N. J. (2023, August). How cognitive biases affect language learning. Medium. https://medium.com/@juozapavicius.nancy/how-cognitive-biases-affect-language-learning-765f7f27810a [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Cherry, K. (2024, January 7). How hindsight bias affects how we view the past. Verywell Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-a-hindsight-bias-2795236 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Çiğdemir, S. & Akyol (2022). Examination of Individual and Environmental Factors Affecting Reading Comprehension with Structural Equation Model. International Journal of Progressive Education, 18(4), 239–254. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2022.459.17 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Creswell, J.W. & Plano Clark, V.L.(2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd. ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. De-La-Peña, C., & Luque-Rojas, M. J. (2021). Levels of Reading Comprehension in Higher Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.712901 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Dunning, D. (2011). The Dunning–Kruger effect. In Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 247–296). https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-385522-0.00005-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Englich, B., Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (2006). Playing dice with criminal sentences: The influence of irrelevant anchors on experts’ judicial decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 188–200. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167205282152 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Flavell, J.H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new era of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Friedman, H. H. (2017). Cognitive Biases that Interfere with Critical Thinking and Scientific Reasoning: A Course Module. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2958800 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Grinblatt, M., Titman, S., and Wermers, R. (1995). Momentum investment strategies, portfolio performance, and herding: A study of mutual fund behavior. Am. Econ. Rev. 85, 1088–1105. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Hodgkinson, G. (2001). Cognitive processes in strategic management: Some emerging trends and future directions. In N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, & H. K. Sinangil (Eds.), Handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology: Organizational psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 416–440). SAGE Publications Ltd. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Ibrahim, W., Abdullah, U., Amalia, H., & Universitas Islam Negeri Raden Fatah. (2024). Factors causing reading comprehension difficulties among the seventh graders. In PROJECT (Professional Journal of English Education) (Vol. 7, Issue 2, pp. 496–501). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Inman, M. (2016, May 23). Hindsight bias | Definition, psychology, & examples. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/hindsight-bias [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374533557/thinkingfastandslow [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Kakinohana, R. K., & Pilati, R. (2023). Differences in decisions affected by cognitive biases: Examining human values, need for cognition, and numeracy. Psicologia-Reflexao E Critica, 36(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41155-023-00265-z [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Knoff, H., PhD. (2025, January 6). How cognitive biases affect student perceptions and educator decisions. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-cognitive-biases-affect-student-perceptions-howie-knoff-ph-d--7nt1e [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Kras, A. (2023, October 22). 12 examples of anchoring bias. InsideBE. https://insidebe.com/articles/12-examples-of-anchoring-bias/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Lestari, P. (2020). The contribution of reading strategy and self-efficacy to the reading comprehension of college students. Education and Linguistics Knowledge Journal, 2(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.32503/edulink.v2i1.992 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Lipnevich, A. A., Eßer, F. J., Park, M. J., & Winstone, N. (2023). Anchored in praise? Potential manifestation of the anchoring bias in feedback reception. Assessment in Education Principles Policy and Practice, 30(1), 4–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594x.2023.2179956 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Mamede, S., van Gog, T., van den Berge, K., Rikers, R. M., van Saase, J. L., van Guldener, C., et al. (2010). Effect of availability bias and reflective reasoning on diagnostic accuracy among internal medicine residents. JAMA, 304, 1198–1203. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2010.1276 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Manguilimotan, R. P., Zabala, J. T., Encog, C. A., Padillo, G. G., & Capuno, R. G. (2024). Factors affecting the reading comprehension skills of Grade 3 learners. International Journal of Social Science Research and Review, 7(3), 96–108. https://doi.org/10.47814/ijssrr.v7i3.1930 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Nikolopoulou, K. (2022). What is confirmation bias? | Definition & examples. Scribbr. https://www.scribbr.com/research-bias/confirmation-bias/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Oakhill, J. V., & Cain, K. (2011). The Precursors of Reading Ability in Young Readers: Evidence from A Four-Year Longitudinal Study. Scientific Studies of Reading, 16(2), 91–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2010.529219 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Oeberst, A., and Goeckenjan, I. (2016). When being wise after the event results in injustice: evidence for hindsight bias in judges’ negligence assessments. Psychol. Public Policy Law 22, 271–279. doi: 10.1037/law0000091 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. OECD (2019), PISA 2018 Results (Volume I): What Students Know and Can Do, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Orellana P, Silva M and Iglesias V (2024) Students’ reading comprehension level and reading demands in teacher education programs: the elephant in the room? Front. Psychol. 15:1324055. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1324055 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Pilat, D., & Sekoul, D. (2021). List of Cognitive Biases and Heuristics - The Decision Lab. The Decision Lab. https://thedecisionlab.com/biases [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

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

39. Saposnik, G., Redelmeier, D., Ruff, C. C., and Tobler, P. N. (2016). Cognitive biases associated with medical decisions: a systematic review. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 6:138. doi: 10.1186/s12911-016-0377-1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Snyder, L., Caccamise, D., & Wise, B. (2005). The Assessment of Reading Comprehension. Topics in Language Disorders, 25(1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.1097/00011363-200501000-00005 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Spencer, M., Wagner, R. K., & Petscher, Y. (2018). The reading comprehension and vocabulary knowledge of children with poor reading comprehension despite adequate decoding: Evidence from a regression-based matching approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000274 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2008). On the relative independence of thinking biases and cognitive ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(4), 672–695. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.4.672 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Thiede, K. W., Griffin, T. D., Wiley, J., & Anderson, M. C. M. (2010). Poor metacomprehension accuracy as a result of inappropriate cue use. Discourse Processes, 47(4), 331-362. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638530902959927 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Tortola, R. (2024). Key factors influencing poor reading comprehension: A qualitative exploratory study. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/382118251 Key Factors Influencing Poor Reading Comprehension A Qualitative Exploratory Study [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Unigwe, C. (2018). Global View on Reading Comprehension: Implication for Family Background on Pupils’ Reading Abilities. In Multidisciplinary Journal of Research Development (Vol. 27, Issue 1). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: the Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Zimmerman, B.J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64-70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip41022 [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