Cognitive group awareness tools are a means to guide collaborative learning activities by providing knowledge-related information to the learners. While positive effects of such tools are firmly established, there is no consistency with regard to the awareness information used and a wide range of target concepts exist. However, attempts to compare and integrate the effects of different types of group awareness information are rare. To reduce this gap, our study aims to compare metacognitive and cognitive group awareness information, combining CSCL research and research on metacognition. In our experimental study, 260 university students discussed assumptions on blood-sugar regulation and diabetes mellitus in dyads. We tested the effects of providing cognitive group awareness information on the learners’ assumptions (factor 1) and metacognitive group awareness information on their confidence (factor 2) on individual metacognitive and cognitive outcome measures and on the learners’ regulation of the collaborative process, i.e., the selection of discussion topics based on confidence in knowledge (confidence-based regulation) and based on agreement regarding assumptions (conflict-based regulation). We found that visualizing information strongly impacts joint regulation and that learners seem to integrate the information provided to steer their learning. However, while the learners gained knowledge and confidence during collaboration, providing group awareness information did not have the expected impact on learning outcomes. Reasons and implications of these results in light of previous research on metacognition and group awareness are discussed.

中文翻译：

---

提供不同类型的团体意识信息以指导协作学习

认知团体意识工具是一种通过向学习者提供知识相关信息来指导协作学习活动的手段。虽然已牢固确立了此类工具的积极作用，但所使用的意识信息并不一致，存在广泛的目标概念。但是，很少尝试比较和整合不同类型的群体意识信息的影响。为了缩小这种差距，我们的研究旨在将CSCL研究与元认知研究相结合，比较元认知和认知群体意识信息。在我们的实验研究中，有260名大学生讨论了关于二糖中血糖调节和糖尿病的假设。我们测试了提供认知小组意识信息对学习者的假设（因子1）和元认知小组意识信息对学习者的信心（因子2）对个体元认知和认知结果度量以及学习者对协作过程的调节的影响，即，基于对知识的信心（基于信心的法规）和基于假设的共识（基于冲突的法规）来选择讨论主题。我们发现可视化信息会严重影响联合监管，学习者似乎会整合所提供的信息以指导他们的学习。但是，尽管学习者在协作过程中获得了知识和信心，但提供小组意识信息并没有对学习成果产生预期的影响。