Despite an increase in research on social regulation of learning, studies on socially shared metacognition are still scarce. This has led to a lack of understanding concerning how groups co-construct metacognitive knowledge, skills, and experiences. In this comparative case study, we qualitatively analyzed video recordings from the meetings of six groups of pharmacy graduate students. For this, we developed a coding scheme that characterized the metacognitive processes of small groups in a project-based learning environment. Using log data collected from a collaboration app, we distinguished which groups rated themselves the highest and lowest overall for metacognitive experiences and then examined differences in the socially shared metacognition processes between these groups. We were able to map 100 strategy codes into four categories with various subcategories representing the cognitive and metacognitive processes used by both groups. We also found that the two groups did not differ on the proportions of different modes of regulation but did differ qualitatively, with the high self-rated group's strategy enactment being more deliberate, targeted, and cohesive than that of the lower self-rated group. Our findings expand understanding of socially shared metacognitive strategies, which has implications for those who aim to improve collaboration by promoting appropriate group-level processes.

尽管对学习的社会调节的研究有所增加，但对社会共享元认知的研究仍然很少。这导致人们对群体如何共同构建元认知知识、技能和经验缺乏了解。在这个比较案例研究中，我们定性分析了六组药学研究生会议的视频记录。为此，我们开发了一种编码方案，该方案描述了基于项目的学习环境中小组的元认知过程。使用从协作应用程序收集的日志数据，我们区分了哪些群体对自己的元认知体验的总体评价最高和最低，然后检查了这些群体之间社会共享元认知过程的差异。我们能够将 100 个策略代码映射到四个类别，其中不同的子类别代表两组使用的认知和元认知过程。我们还发现，两组在不同监管模式的比例上没有差异，但存在质的差异，高自评组的策略制定比自评低组更深思熟虑、更有针对性和凝聚力。我们的研究结果扩展了对社会共享元认知策略的理解，这对那些旨在通过促进适当的群体级流程来改善协作的人具有影响。高自评组的战略制定比自评低组更深思熟虑、更有针对性和凝聚力。我们的研究结果扩展了对社会共享元认知策略的理解，这对那些旨在通过促进适当的群体级流程来改善协作的人具有影响。高自评组的战略制定比自评低组更深思熟虑、更有针对性和凝聚力。我们的研究结果扩展了对社会共享元认知策略的理解，这对那些旨在通过促进适当的群体级流程来改善协作的人具有影响。