www.ijcrsee.com

Gojkov-Rajić, A., Šafranj, J., & Gak, D. (2023). Self-Condence in Metacognitive Processes in L2 Learning, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 1-13.

Introduction

The research is focused on the importance of self-condence in the self-regulated motivation of the

gifted for L2 learning. The theoretical context for exploring this phenomenon consists of Sternberg’s (2020)

Triarchic Theory of Intelligence and the Theory of Self-Determination (Ryan and Deci, 2000). What makes

this question interesting? Understanding motivation for L2 learning and its relationship with intelligence

and other important cognitive and non-cognitive constructs is still insufcient for what L2 pedagogy would

need to effectively teach and direct students to self-regulated learning (SRL), i.e., learning autonomy.

However, self-condence increasingly attracts the attention of researchers in this eld of study.

In the last few decades, self-condence has been an important notion in cognitive psychology,

general didactics, and L2 pedagogy. Thus, the “self-condence movement” (Singal, 2017) considers the

lack of self-condence as one of the factors of mental or emotional difculties, and in the eld of learning,

it is believed that improving self-condence can result in better performances (Zimmerman et al., 1997).

The results of studies on the complexity of the phenomenon of self-condence indicate differences

between the overlapping concepts of self-efcacy, self-condence, and self-esteem (Oney and Oksuzoglu-

Guven, 2015). Self-efcacy is dened as the individual’s belief in their own ability to inuence events in

their life and resolve future situations (Bandura, 1990), while self-esteem is based on ideas about the

value or dignity of the individual. Therefore, it is concluded that self-esteem is more present-oriented,

while self-efcacy is a more future-oriented belief. The third related term is self-condence, which is

dened as an individual’s expectations for performances and self-evaluation of abilities and previous

performances (Lenney, 1977; 1981; Lenney, Gold and Browning, 1983). The main idea in this concept is

Self-Condence in Metacognitive Processes in L2 Learning

Aleksandra Gojkov-Rajić

, Jelisaveta Šafranj

, Dragana Gak

Teacher Training Faculty, University of Belgrade, Serbia, e-mail: rajis@mts.rs

University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Technical Sciences, Novi Sad, Serbia, e-mail: savetas@uns.ac.rs, dgak@uns.ac.rs

Abstract: The study aims to identify the role of self-condence, meta-cognition, personality traits, and motivation

(predictive variables) as factors of success in second language (L2) learning. It is assumed that there is a high correlation

between the observed variables in the meta-cognitive process, which distinguishes academically gifted students from regular

students, and that self-condence is an autonomous factor of success and has a signicant role in the self-regulated motivation

of gifted students. The results on the Language Prociency Test are a criterion variable, while gender, residence in the country

of the native speaker, duration of L2 learning, and average grade in studies are moderator variables. The sample is convenient,

and consists of 460 students from the University of Novi Sad and the University of Belgrade. The research was carried out using

a quantitative approach and a method of systematic non-experimental observation. The following instruments are used: the

Big Five Personality Traits Questionnaire, the Meta-cognitive Awareness Inventory, the Memory and Reasoning Competence

Inventory, the English Language Motivation Questionnaire, the Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale, and the L2 Prociency Test. The

main ndings conrmed the hypothesis of a high correlation between the observed variables in the meta-cognitive process that

distinguishes academically gifted students from regular students, as well as that self-condence is an autonomous factor of

success and plays an important role in the self-regulated motivation of the gifted. This conrms the signicance of self-condence

in self-regulation and provides an indirect role in L2 learning achievements. Students should be aware of meta-cognitive processes

and try to self-regulate their knowledge and learning strategies.

Keywords: gifted, self-condence, meta-cognition, self-regulated motivation, L2 language.

Original scientic paper

Received: December, 04.2022.

Revised: December, 30.2022.

Accepted: December, 31.2022.

UDK:

37.015.3:159.923.07-057.875

37.091.3::81’243

10.23947/2334-8496-2023-11-1-1-13

Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Corresponding author: savetas@uns.ac.rs

www.ijcrsee.com

Gojkov-Rajić, A., Šafranj, J., & Gak, D. (2023). Self-Condence in Metacognitive Processes in L2 Learning, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 1-13.

the individuals’ condence in their own abilities, capacities, and assessments, or condence that they can

succeed in facing everyday challenges and demands (Colman, 2008). Self-condence has been related

to self-belief, satisfaction with one’s abilities and successes, and also to the energy and motivation to take

action and achieve goals. Thus, self-condence is similar to self-efcacy in that it tends to focus on an

individual’s future performances. However, it is considered to be based on previous performances, and

thus, it is focused on the past as well. Many scholars refer to self-efcacy when looking at individuals’

beliefs in their abilities in relation to a particular task, while self-condence is more often seen as a broader

and more stable trait relating to individuals’ perception of overall ability.

Through the mediating function of motivation, studies have also established interrelationships

between the aforementioned success factors as well as their individual relationship with L2 knowledge

(Noels and Giles, 2009). The ndings of several studies that consider the meaning and denition of this

term will be mentioned further in the discussion. The ndings of Stankov (2013) and Stankov and Lee

(2014) refer to the statement that the success of individuals with high self-condence lies in the following

properties: a higher sense of self-worth; higher enjoyment in activities and life in general; lack of self-doubt

and apprehension; social anxiety and stress reduction; more energy and motivation to act; enjoyment of

interacting with other people at social gatherings; relaxation; and condence that others feel at ease in

our presence.

In addition to previous ndings that are related to self-condence and support its signicance for a

wide range of aspects of an individual’s life, studies also provide opposite ndings. It has been noted that

increasing trust does not always lead to improved positive outcomes (Brinkman et al., 2015; Forsyth et al.,

2007), and there are also negative correlations with self-condence. Kremer and his associates (2013)

conclude that self-condence has been constantly increasing during the last decades, leading to increasing

narcissism and unrealistic expectations. It is thought that more caution is needed while encouraging self-

condence in children and youth (Singal, 2017). Thus, the belief that a positive self-image is essential for

a happy and successful life focuses solely on its positive attributes and creates an age of self-condence

in which children of these generations are taught in schools and at home to view themselves as special.

Children are praised for modest accomplishments, but recent research indicates that this practise and

these beliefs may contribute to low motivation and a decrease in goal-directed behaviour rather than

protecting individuals from depression (Dweck, 1999; Blackwell, Trzesniewski and Dweck, 2007). It is

even believed that strengthening self-condence leads more effectively to an increase in narcissism and

a decrease in ambition than to achievement and success. Therefore, the question is whether the idea

of improving self-condence should be rejected. Some researchers (Baumeister et al., 2003) noted that

there are certain contexts in which strengthening self-condence can improve performances, and that

these opportunities should be supported. The same authors advocate strengthening self-condence, but

in a more moderate and cautious way (Baumeister et al., 2003), providing support for self-condence

with praise, and increasing self-condence as a reward for socially desirable behaviour. Accordingly, it

encourages the development of healthy self-condence and avoids the risk that children become convinced

of their own competence without investing any effort. In addition, children and young people should be

allowed to experience failure and cope with consequences and disappointment, which will probably help

them to develop resilience and success in coping skills (Pajares, 1996; Kudinov et al., 2020).

Accordingly, the scholars agree with the opinion of Seligman (1998), who argues that a positive

image of oneself does not produce anything. A sustainable sense of self-condence stems from positive

and productive behaviour. Therefore, developing self-condence means that it should be practiced,

because progress toward personally signicant goals is considered to be the foundation on which healthy

self-condence is built (Seligman, 1998). The path towards self-regulation implies being aware of the fact

that failure is inherent to achievements, and in order to pursue their goals, individuals need to work hard

and face their weaknesses (Altaras, 2006; Letić, 2015). Even those who are exceptional in particular areas

of life perform less well in other areas. That is why the view that success does not come by chance but

should be achieved and comes from giving our best has been increasingly accepted (Csikszentmihályi,

1988; Stankov and Crawford, 1997).

In contemporary conceptions of giftedness, there are differences starting with the personality

prole, the ability to tolerate solitude, motivation, and intellectual-moral independence in the sense

of autonomous, non-conformist thinking and behaviour of the gifted. There are disagreements in the

research ndings related to high self-condence and hypersensitivity (Lee and Olszewski-Kubilius, 2006).

Subotnikova and Džarvinova (Subotnik and Jarvin, 2005) emphasise the importance of self-

condence in the musical development of the gifted, which goes beyond the level of technical skill. There

are also well-known studies regarding the predictive value of self-efcacy in gifted individuals (McCormick,

2003).

www.ijcrsee.com

Gojkov-Rajić, A., Šafranj, J., & Gak, D. (2023). Self-Condence in Metacognitive Processes in L2 Learning, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 1-13.

According to the research ndings, self-esteem, a construct developed by the Self-Esteem

Movement (Singal, 2017) could not explain poor performance and emotional problems in gifted students

in the eld of learning (Zimmerman et al., 1997). The new wave of research into the signicance of non-

cognitive factors for the achievements of gifted students also included research into the overlapping

concepts of gifted and regular students’ self-efcacy, self-condence, and self-esteem (Oney and

Oksuzoglu-Guven, 2015). According to the research ndings, self-efcacy is more pronounced in the

gifted and can be considered a signicant factor of good self-assessment and belief on the part of the

gifted individuals in their own ability to inuence events and is linked to their success in solving challenges

and life problems (Benabou and Tirole, 2002). The ndings also indicate that the individual’s expectations

of performance and self-evaluation of abilities and previous performance are more pronounced in gifted

individuals (Lenney, 1981; Lenney, Gold and Browning, 1983), as is the individual’s condence in their

own abilities, capacities, and assessments, or their belief that they can successfully face daily challenges

and demands (Colman, 2008). Researchers refer to self-efcacy when observing an individual’s beliefs

about their abilities in relation to a specic task, whereas self-condence of the gifted appears more

frequently as a broader and more stable trait concerning the perception of their overall abilities (Kleitman

and Stankov, 2007). Research has also determined mutual connections between self-condence and the

success of the gifted, as well as with L2 knowledge through the mediating function of motivation (Noels,

Pelletier and Vallerand, 2000).

This research is exploratory, based on a quantitative approach and systematic non-experimental

observation. The aim of the research is to identify relationships and the role of self-condence, meta-

cognition, personality traits, and motivation (predictive variables) in L2 learning, i.e., to examine these

factors within the taxonomy of cognitive and meta-cognitive processes.

The assumption is that there is a high correlation between the observed variables in the meta-

cognitive process, which distinguishes academically gifted students from other students, as well as that

self-condence has an autonomous and signicant role in the self-regulated motivation of the gifted. In

addition to the above predictor variables, the research takes success on the Prociency Test as a criterion

variable. Gender, residence in the country of the native speaker, years of learning L2 language, and

average grade in studies were taken as moderator variables.

Materials and Methods

The sample is convenient and consists of students from the University of Belgrade and the University

of Novi Sad. Four hundred and sixty respondents participated in the research, of which 345 (75%) were

female participants. Of the total number of respondents, 105 stated that they resided in the country of the

native speaker, and the length of residing time ranged from one week (7 days) to 17 years. The sample

consisted of 205 academically gifted students (with an average grade above 9) and 255 regular students.

Instruments

The Big Five Personality Traits Questionnaire (Goldberg, 2001) The questionnaire was intended

to assess the “big ve” personality traits, where each trait was measured through 10 items on a ve-point

Likert scale (1 = completely disagree, 5 = completely agree). The reliability of the scales measured by

Cronbach’s alpha were: extraversion = 0.78, emotional stability = 0.83, openness to experience = 0.63,

agreeableness = 0.67, and conscientiousness = 0.61. Thus, the reliability values of the scales ranged

from acceptable to good.

The Meta-cognitive Awareness Inventory (Schraw and Dennison, 1994) consists of 52 items with

a binary response format (True or False). It consists of two scales: knowledge of cognition and regulation

of cognition. The reliability of the scales measured by Cronbach’s alpha was: knowledge about cognition

= 0.62 and regulation of cognition = 0.76, indicating acceptable reliability.

English Language Motivation Questionnaire (LLOS-IEA; Noels, Pelletier and Vallerand, 2000). The

questionnaire consists of 21 items on a ve-point Likert scale that measure seven types of motivation

for L2 learning: amotivation, external regulation, introjected regulation, identied regulation, knowledge,

achievement, and stimulation. Cronbach’s alpha reliability values were as follows: Motivation = 0.82;

external regulation = 0.61; introjected regulation = 0.71; identied regulation = 0.83; knowledge = 0.84;

achievement = 0.88; stimulation = 0.93, indicating acceptable reliability.

The Memory and Reasoning Competence Inventory (Stankov and Crawford, 1997) is a scale

consisting of 16 items measured on a six-point Likert scale. The instrument is divided into two subscales

intended to measure memory competence and reasoning competence. The reliability of the scales

www.ijcrsee.com

Gojkov-Rajić, A., Šafranj, J., & Gak, D. (2023). Self-Condence in Metacognitive Processes in L2 Learning, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 1-13.

measured by Cronbach’s alpha was: memory competence = 0.85 and reasoning competence = 0.81,

indicating acceptable reliability.

The Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965; Rosenberg, Schooler and Schoenbach,

1989), which was partially adjusted for self-condence in this study, is a 10-item scale measured on a

four-point Likert scale and measures the overall level of self-esteem and self-condence by assessing

the person’s positive and negative feelings about themselves. Cronbach’s alpha calculated the scale’s

reliability to be 0.87, indicating excellent reliability.

Data analysis

The average summation scores were calculated for all instruments in order to reduce them to the

scale for the answers of each particular instrument for easier interpretation and comparison. Relationships

between self-condence, meta-cognition, personality traits, motivation, and success on the L2 prociency

test were determined by calculating Pearson’s correlation coefcient. In order to examine the inuence

of self-esteem and self-condence, meta-cognition, personality traits, and motivation more systematically

(with mutual control of predictors) on success in L2 learning, a hierarchical regression analysis was

conducted. In the rst step of the analysis, personality traits (extraversion, emotional stability, openness

to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness) were introduced as predictors, while in the

second step, types of motivation, self-condence, meta-cognition scales, and memory and reasoning

competences were introduced, with success in the L2 language prociency test as the criterion variable.

The t-test for independent samples was used to test the idea that gifted (average grade above 9)

and regular students are different in meta-cognitive processes and self-condence.

In the PROCESS macro for SPSS, the moderator role of specic variables between meta-cognitive

processes, self-condence, and L2 prociency test success was investigated using moderator analyses.

Here, the moderator variables were gender, residence in the country of a native speaker, years of L2

learning, and average grade in studies. The PROCESS macro moderation examined the relationship

between one predictor, one moderator, and one dependent variable per analysis.

Results

Descriptive statistics

The basic descriptive indicators for the variables in the study are shown in Table 1. For all variables,

skewness and kurtosis values are in the recommended range of ± 2 (George and Mallery, 2010) indicating

that the variables do not deviate signicantly from the univariate normal distribution. It is important to note

that the higher scores on the scales of the questionnaire on meta-cognition were closer to 1, because

the number 1 indicated agreement with the item and 0 indicated disagreement. The average grade in L2

was measured in the range of 6 to 10, and it was 8.55, indicating a good performance of the sample in

L2 learning.

Table 1

Descriptive indicators of research variables

www.ijcrsee.com

Gojkov-Rajić, A., Šafranj, J., & Gak, D. (2023). Self-Condence in Metacognitive Processes in L2 Learning, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 1-13.

Correlation of variables

Pearson’s correlation coefcient between the research variables is shown in Table 2. The grade on

the L2 prociency test shows a signicant correlation with most scales, although these correlations are

of low intensity. The highest correlation with the grade is stimulation (r = 0.34) and knowledge (r = 0.33).

Knowledge, achievement, and stimulation are highly correlated, with coefcients close to r = 0.70. Among

personality traits, the highest correlation is between openness to experience and conscientiousness (r

= 0.32), but all correlations are of low to moderate intensity. A high correlation (r = 0.70) also existed

between the scales of the Memory and Reasoning Competence Inventory.

Hierarchical regression, inuence on the grade in L2

Since some of the correlations between the variables were high, the VIF criterion was used to nd

problems with multicollinearity. Since none of the predictors in the analysis had a VIF criterion higher than

4, all of the predictors were kept in the model.

In the rst step of the hierarchical regression analysis (Table 3), personality traits were introduced

as predictors, and they explain a signicant part of the criterion variance, F (5, 453) = 14.61, p <0.001,

R2 = 0.14, about 14% of the variance. In the rst step of the analysis, extraversion appears as a positive

predictor, and conscientiousness and emotional stability appear as negative signicant predictors. Upon

the introduction of other predictors, the model signicantly improves, Fc (12, 441) = 9.22, p <0.001, R2c

= 0.17, and about 17% of the additional variance has been explained, for a total of about 31% (R2 = 0.31,

R2adjusted = 0.28). After the introduction of additional predictors, extraversion, emotional stability, and

conscientiousness remain important predictors, while identied regulation, stimulation, and self-esteem

(Rosenberg self-esteem and self-condence scale) appear as additional important predictors, with all new

predictors being positive. An increase in the average score on the L2 prociency test is associated with an

increase in the scales of these predictors.

Table 2

Correlation of research variables

Note: RA – Rosenberg self-esteem scale; MTK – Meta-cognition questionnaire; * - p < 0.05; ** - p < 0.01.

www.ijcrsee.com

Gojkov-Rajić, A., Šafranj, J., & Gak, D. (2023). Self-Condence in Metacognitive Processes in L2 Learning, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 1-13.

Table 3

Partial contribution of predictors in the hierarchical regression model

Differences between the academically gifted and other students

Results of the t-test for independent samples are shown in Table 4. These indicate differences

across the three scales in the expected direction. On the scales of knowledge and regulation of cognition

(meta-cognition), the academically gifted students scored higher, indicating higher levels of these meta-

cognitive traits as well as higher self-condence.

Table 4

Differences between academically gifted and regular students

Moderation analyses

Gender as moderator

All moderations were examined by introducing a moderator into the model in addition to only one

main predictor and criterion. Gender is not a signicant moderator in the case of the inuence of knowledge

of cognition (meta-cognitive process) on success in L2 learning, F (1, 456) = 0.09, p> 0.05; and the

interaction of gender and knowledge of cognition does not improve the model. Gender is a signicant

moderator in the inuence of regulation of cognition (me-ta-cognitive process) on L2 learning success

(F (1, 456) = 4.01, p = 0.046), as well as the inuence of self-condence on L2 learning success (F (1,

456) = 4.92, p = 0.027). In order to better interpret the moderation effect, the signicant interaction effects

are presented in Chart 1, which shows moderation between regulation of cognition and gender. Here,

the largest difference is in the grade among respondents with higher levels of regulation of cognition. In

this case, females have signicantly higher grades than males, while these differences are negligible at

lower levels of regulation of cognition. Moderation of self-condence and gender show that at lower levels

of self-condence, both males and females have nearly identical grades in L2, whereas increasing self-

condence improves grades for females but not for males.

www.ijcrsee.com

Gojkov-Rajić, A., Šafranj, J., & Gak, D. (2023). Self-Condence in Metacognitive Processes in L2 Learning, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 1-13.

Chart 1. Moderation between regulation of cognition and gender based on the grade in L2

Chart 2. Moderation between self-condence and gender based on the grade in L2

Residing in the country of native speaker as moderator

In the case of scales of meta-cognitive processes, knowledge, and regulation, residing in the

country of a native speaker did not prove to be a signicant moderator, F (1, 456) = 0.61, p> 0.05 and F

(1, 456) = 0.10, p> 0.05, and the introduction of interaction does not improve the model. In the case of

self-condence, a signicant interaction can be seen F (1, 456) = 13.16, p <0.001, and the introduction

of the interaction of self-condence and residing in the country of a native speaker signicantly improves

the model. The interaction is shown in Chart 3. For the success in L2 of students’ with low levels of self-

condence, it is more important whether they resided in the country of the native speaker or not, while this

factor is insignicant for students with high levels of self-condence, whose success does not depend on

whether they resided in the country of the native speaker or not.

www.ijcrsee.com

Gojkov-Rajić, A., Šafranj, J., & Gak, D. (2023). Self-Condence in Metacognitive Processes in L2 Learning, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 1-13.

Chart 3. Moderation between self-condence and residing in the country of native speaker based

on the grade in L2

Length of residing in the country of native speaker

Moderation analysis in the case of the length of residing in the country of the native speaker was

conducted on a subsample of students who stated that they resided in the country of the native speaker (n

= 104). They were divided into two categories: students residing for less than a month (n = 44) and those

residing for a month or longer (n = 66). The length of residence did not prove to be a signicant moderator

in any of the models: F (1, 100) = 2.29, p> 0.05, F (1, 100) = 2.82, p> 0.05 and F (1, 100) = 0.28, p> 0.05

Average grade in studies

The average grade in the studies does not prove to be a signicant moderator in the case of meta-

cognitive processes, F (1, 456) = 1.77, p> 0.05 and F (1, 456) = 0.97, p> 0.05, and self-condence, F (1,

456) = 2.51, p> 0.05.

Length of L2 learning

The length of L2 learning proves to be a signicant moderator in all models. Improvement of all

three models, knowledge of cognition, F (1, 456) = 8.12, p = 0.005, regulation of cognition, F (1, 456)

= 11.23, p = 0.001, and self-condence, F (1, 456 ) = 14.14, p <0.001, is statistically signicant when

introducing the interaction with the length of L2 learning. These moderation effects are shown in Charts 4,

5, and 6. In all charts, the different colours indicate different lengths of L2 learning (in standard deviations).

Those who have been learning the language longer have the highest scores in cases of high knowledge

of cognition, while their scores are the lowest in cases of low knowledge of cognition. This pattern is

reversed in the case of those who have been learning L2 for a shorter period of time. In the case of

moderation of regulation of cognition and length of L2 learning, for those with low regulation, the grade is

lower and the same regardless of the length of L2 learning, while for those with high regulation, the grade

is better for those who have been learning L2 for a longer period of time. A high level of self-condence

has been shown to be more important than the length of L2 learning for those with high levels of self-

condence, and they have high grades regardless of the length of learning. On the other hand, at lower

levels of self-condence, the length of L2 learning is more crucial for achieving a better result on the L2

prociency test.

www.ijcrsee.com

Gojkov-Rajić, A., Šafranj, J., & Gak, D. (2023). Self-Condence in Metacognitive Processes in L2 Learning, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 1-13.

Chart 4. Moderation between knowledge of cognition and length of L2 learning based on the grade

in L2

Chart 5. Moderation between regulation of cognition and length of L2 learning based on the grade

in L2

Chart 6. Moderation between self-condence and length of L2 learning based on the grade in L2

www.ijcrsee.com

Gojkov-Rajić, A., Šafranj, J., & Gak, D. (2023). Self-Condence in Metacognitive Processes in L2 Learning, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 1-13.

Discussion

The result of a close relationship between knowledge (MTK), achievement, and regulation (MTK

with coefcients of correlation close to r = 0.70) and success L2 knowledge, referring to students from

the category of academically gifted (with an average grade above 9.00), emphasises the close relation

of intellectual potentials, i.e., academic giftedness, with cognitive and meta-cognitive variables, which, in

synergy, each in its own way, contribute to self-regulation shown in the realisation of academic giftedness.

From a theoretical point of view, the previous statements t into the notions of the inuence of contextual

approaches and modern conceptions of intelligence, which emphasise the importance of social context

for determining behaviour that will be considered a reection of intelligence, and directly into Sternberg’s

concept of intelligence (2009) in which meta-cognition is seen as the regulation of intellectual functioning.

So, it could be noted that the ndings discussed here conrm the importance of this understanding, as

well as the components by which Sternberg (2009) dened this concept (meta-cognition as a cognitive

phenomenon of higher order - cognition about cognition, i.e., intellectualization of various cognitive

functions, including the intellect itself - about the characteristics, powers and limitations of cognitive

functioning; regulatory role in relation to cognition-strategies of monitoring and managing one’s own

cognition and behaviour (meta-cognitive decisions about what to look out for, what to check well, in which

direction to search for a solution, etc.). The previous ndings indicate that gifted individuals are using

strategies and meta-cognitive abilities, especially for resolving complex and demanding tasks. Thus, it

seems that efforts to improve the application of strategies and meta-memories of academically gifted

individuals, in this case in the eld of L2 learning, have shown signicant effects, which is in line with

previous studies (Gojkov Rajić et al., 2021; Šafranj and Gojkov Rajić, 2019), and it could be concluded

that this direction is worth following.

The ndings of this study are consistent with other researchers’ ndings on the importance of

meta-cognition (Kleitman and Stankov, 2007). Trying to clarify self-condence within the framework of

a taxonomy of cognitive and meta-cognitive processes, they found that these phenomena are crucial in

identifying factors that facilitate intelligent behaviour and that they cross the limited scope of traditional

notions of intelligence. The same authors also accept the assumption that meta-cognitive knowledge and

skills are essential components of successful learning because they can lead to the choice of strategies

and, where necessary, anticipate their adaptation, which is emphasised by Sternberg (1997) as well. The

results that conrm the importance of knowledge (MTK), meta-cognition, and the importance of assessing

awareness of one’s own cognitive weaknesses and strengths (Kleitman and Stankov, 2007) are in line

with the ndings discussed here. From the point of view of didactic implications, the ndings of this

research can help students work on developing an adequate level of success as well as condence in

their cognitive performance and self-help in the effective use of their own cognitive abilities and strategies

in L2 learning.

The high correlation (r = 0.70) between memory and reasoning scales and self-condence

indicates the importance of another construct (self-condence) for the prediction of success in L2

learning. The following were included in the composite of signicant predictors of achievement in L2

learning: extraversion, emotional stability, conscientiousness, identied regulation, stimulation, and

self-condence. Furthermore, it could be concluded that there are several cognitive and non-cognitive

components important for the self-regulation of gifted students in the eld of L2 learning. The complexity

of the phenomenon of self-regulation is also revealed in this nding.

The ndings related to self-condence, which Kleitman and Stankov (Kleitman and Stankov, 2007;

Stankov, 2013) characterise as a broad psychological trait that intersects different cognitive domains, are

pointed out for comparison. It was signicant to include self-condence in the variables that seek to answer

the question of what their relationship is and how much individual contribution there is to achievement

in L2. It helps teachers and students build meta-cognitive strategies for L2 learning. The ndings of

this research are in line with the above-mentioned in terms of their close relation to intellectual and

meta-cognitive potentials. Thus, the correlation between self-condence and meta-cognitive abilities of

academically gifted students in their achievements in L2 places self-condence in the meta-cognitive eld

of the cognitive/meta-cognitive taxonomy (Kleitman and Stankov, 2007). Moreover, when investigating the

importance of self-condence, which is shown to be more important for achievement than other moderator

variables (length of L2 learning and residing in the country of a native speaker), the obtained results

are in line with the ndings conrming the specic place of self-condence in the taxonomy of cognitive

and meta-cognitive processes. It conrms the ndings of other researchers (Teovanović, Knežević and

Stankov, 2015) on self-condence as a signicant factor, but is also independent of other cognitive and

non-cognitive factors in L2 learning. It functions independently in its contribution to the self-realization of

www.ijcrsee.com

Gojkov-Rajić, A., Šafranj, J., & Gak, D. (2023). Self-Condence in Metacognitive Processes in L2 Learning, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 1-13.

intellectual potentials for mastering foreign languages.

This nding is another conrmation of the opinion (Seligman, 1998) that a positive self-image is

insufcient for a sense of security and self-realization and that supporting the development of self-condence

implies the need for practice, because self-condence is based on making progress towards personally

important goals. Thus, self-regulation entails being aware that failure is inherent in accomplishments, and

achieving self-realization and self-condence necessitates exerting effort as well as confronting our own

weaknesses. Gifted students have weaknesses as well; in some areas, they are stronger than others.

Based on self-regulation, they accept the fact that success does not come by chance but rather stems

from dedication and self-correction (Csikszentmihályi, 1988), which certainly has signicant implications

for L2 pedagogy. Therefore, it could be concluded that the ndings of the studies on negative correlates

with self-condence cannot be accepted (Brinkman et al., 2015; Kremer, Brannen and Glennerster, 2013),

but the agreement remains regarding the need to promote self-condence in children and youth in order to

prevent narcissism and an unrealistic sense of self-condence, an illusion that in L2 knowledge is usually

quickly shattered.

Conclusion

The main ndings conrmed the hypothesis of a high correlation between the observed variables in

the meta-cognitive process that distinguishes academically gifted students from regular students, as well

as that self-condence is an autonomous factor of success and has a signicant role in the self-regulated

motivation of the gifted. This further conrms the signicance of self-condence in self-regulation and, as

can be seen from the results, provides an indirect role in L2 learning achievements. Thus, students and

L2 teachers should be aware of meta-cognitive processes and try to self-regulate their knowledge and

learning strategies so that they are consistent with other cognitive and non-cognitive factors, such as

personality traits and types of motivation.

Acknowledgement

This research paper has been supported by the Ministry of Science, Technological Development,

and Innovation through Project No. 451-03-47/2023-01/200156 “Innovative scientic and artistic research

from the FTS activity domain”.

Conict of interests

The authors declare no conict of interest.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.G.R., J.Š. and D.G.; methodology, A.G.R.; software, J.Š.; formal analysis,

D.G. and J.Š.; writing—original draft preparation, A.G.R. and D.G.; writing—review and editing, J.Š. and

A.G.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

References

Altaras, A. (2006). Darovitost i podbacivanje [Giftedness and underachievement]. Mali Nemo, Institut za psihologiju & Centar

za primenjenu psihologiju Društva psihologa Srbije: Pancevo-Beograd, Serbia.

Bandura A. (1990). Self-regulation of motivation through anticipatory and self-reactive mechanisms. Nebraska Symposium on

Motivation. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. 38: 69-164.

Baumeister, R., Jennifer, F,. Campbell, D., & Krueger, J. I. (2003). Does High Self-Esteem Cause Better Performance,

Interpersonal Success, Happiness, or Healthier Lifestyles? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4(1), 1-44.

https://doi.org/10.1111/1529-1006.01431.

Benabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2002). Self-condence and personal motivation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(3), 871–

915. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355302760193913

Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across

an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child development, 78(1), 246-263. https://doi.

org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.00995.x

Brinkman, D.J., Tichelaar, J., Agtmael, M.A., Vries T.P.G., & Richir, M.C. (2015). Self-reported condence in prescribing skills

correlates poorly with assessed competence in fourth-year medical students, The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology,

55(7), 825-830. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcph.474

www.ijcrsee.com

Gojkov-Rajić, A., Šafranj, J., & Gak, D. (2023). Self-Condence in Metacognitive Processes in L2 Learning, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 1-13.

Colman, A. M. (2008).

A Dictionary of Psychology

, Edition 4

. Oxford University Press, https://doi.org/10.1093/acref/9780199534067.001.0001

Csikszentmihályi, M. (1988). The ow experience and its signicance for human psychology. In M. Csikszentmihályi & I. S.

Csikszentmihályi (Eds.), Optimal experience: Psychological studies of ow in consciousness (pp. 15–35). Cambridge

University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511621956.002

Dweck, C.S. (1999). Self-theories: Their Role in Motivation, Personality, and Development (1

ed.). Psychology Press. Taylor

& Francis Group https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315783048

Forsyth, D. R., Lawrence, N.K., Burnette, J. L., & Baumeister, R.F. (2007). Attempting to Improve the Academic Performance

of Struggling College Students by Bolstering Their 2007 Self–esteem: An Intervention that Backred; Journal of Social

and Clinical Psychology 26(4):447-459. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2007.26.4.447

George, D. & Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference, 17.0 update (10a ed.)

Boston: Pearson.

Gojkov-Rajić, A., Stojanović, A., Šafranj, J. & Gojkov, G. (2021). Didaktički aspekti samoregulacije učenja darovitih [Didactic

aspects of self-regulation of gifted learning], monograja, Srpska akademija obrazovanja, Beograd.

Goldberg, L. R. (2001). International personality item pool.

Kleitman, S. & Stankov, L. (2007). Self-condence and meta-cognitive processes, Learning and Individual Differences, 17(2),

161-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2007.03.004.

Kremer, M., Brannen, C., & Glennerster, R. (2013). The challenge of education and learning in the developing world. Science,

340(6130), 297-300. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1235350

Kudinov, I. S., Kudinov, S. S., Mikhailova, B. O., Kudinov, S. V., & Imomberdieva, M. N. (2020). Different self-attitude indicators

in students and their self-realization in a University, International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering

and Education (IJCRSEE), 8(3), 47-59. https://doi.org/10.23947/2334-8496-2020-8-3-47-59

Lee, S.-Y., & Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2006). The Emotional Intelligence, Moral Judgment, and Leadership of Academically Gifted

Adolescents. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30(1), 29 - 67. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235320603000103

Lenney, E. (1977). Women’s self-condence in achievement settings. Psychological Bulletin, 84(1), 1–13. https://doi.

org/10.1037/0033-2909.84.1.1

Lenney, E. (1981). What’s ne for the gander isn’t always good for the goose: Sex differences in self-condence as a function

of ability area and comparison with others. Sex Roles, 7, 905–924 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00290974

Lenney, E., Gold, J. & Browning, C. (1983). Sex differences in self-condence: The inuence of comparison to others’ ability

level. Sex Roles, 9, 925–942. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00290054

Letić, (2015). Značaj moralnih i liderskih svojstava za ostvarenje darovitosti [The importance of moral and leadership qualities

for the realization of giftedness], Doktorska disertacija, Filozofski fakultet, Univerzitet u Novom Sadu.

McCormick, C. B. (2003). Meta-cognition and learning. In W. M. Reynolds & G. E. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of psychology:

Educational psychology, Vol. 7, pp. 79–102). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.. https://doi.org/10.1002/0471264385.wei0705

Noels, K. A., Pelletier, L. G., & Vallerand, R. J. (2000). Why are you learning a second language? Motivational orientations and

self-determination theory. Language Learning, 50(S1), 57–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00111

Noels, K.A., & Giles, H. (2009). Social identity and language learning. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.) The New Handbook of

Second Language Acquisition. (pp. 647-670). Bingley, UK: Emerald.

Oney, E., & Oksuzoglu-Guven, G. (2015). Condence: A critical review of the literature and an alternative perspective for general

and specic self-condence. Psychological Reports, 116(1), 149–163. https://doi.org/10.2466/07.PR0.116k14w0.

Pajares, F. (1996). Self-Efcacy Beliefs in Academic Settings. Review of Educational Research. 66(4), 543-578. https://doi.

org/10.3102/003465430660045

Rosenberg, M. (1965). Rozenbergova skala samopoštovanja [Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale], Retrieved from https://www.

scribd.com/document/395539719/Rosenbergova-skala-samopo%C5%A1tovanja

Rosenberg, M., Schooler, C., & Schoenbach, C. (1989). Self-Esteem and Adolescent Problems: Modeling Reciprocal Effects.

American Sociological Review, 54, 1004-1018. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095720

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and

well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066X.55.1.68. PMID: 11392867.

Šafranj, J., & Gojkov-Rajić, A. (2019). The Role of Personality Traits in the Choice and Use of Language Learning Strategies,

Društvena istraživanja, 28(4): 691-709. https://doi.org/10.5559/di.28.4.07

Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing meta-cognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4),

460 475. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033

Seligman, B. A. (1998). Trust and sociability on the limits of condence and role expectations. American Journal of Economics

and Sociology, 57, 391–404. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1536-7150.1998.tb03372.x

Singal, J. (2017). How the Self-Esteem Craze Took Over America And why the hype was irresistible. https://www.thecut.

com/2017/05/self-esteem-grit-do-they-really-help.html; Retrieved 2. 06. 2021.

Stankov, L. & Crawford, J. D. (1997). Self-condence and performance on tests of cognitive abilities, Intelligence 25(2), 93-109.

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-2896(97)90047-7.

Stankov, L. (2013). Non-cognitive predictors of intelligence and academic achievement: An important role of condence.

Personality and Individual Differences, 55(7), 727–732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.07.006

Stankov, L., & Lee, J. (2014). Quest for the best non-cognitive predictor of academic achievement. Educational Psychology,

34(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2013.858908

Sternberg, R. J. (1997). The concept of intelligence and its role in lifelong learning and success. American Psychologist,

52(10), 1030–1037. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.10.1030

Sternberg, R. J. (2009). The theory of successful intelligence. In J. C. Kaufman, E. L. Grigorenko (Eds.) & R. J. Sternberg, The

essential Sternberg: Essays on intelligence, psychology, and education (pp. 71–100). Springer Publishing Co.

Sternberg, R. J. (2020). Understanding the Triarchic Theory of Intelligence, Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/

triarchic-theory-of-intelligence-4172497.

Subotnik, R. F., & Jarvin, L. (2005). Beyond Expertise: Conceptions of Giftedness as Great Performance. In R. J. Sternberg &

J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 343–357). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/

CBO9780511610455.020

www.ijcrsee.com

Gojkov-Rajić, A., Šafranj, J., & Gak, D. (2023). Self-Condence in Metacognitive Processes in L2 Learning, International

Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 11(1), 1-13.

Teovanović, P., Knežević, G., & Stankov, L. (2015). Individual differences in cognitive biases: Evidence against one-factor

theory of rationality. Intelligence, 50, 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2015.02.008

Zimmerman, M. A., Copeland, L. A., Shope, J. T., & Dielman, T.E. (1997). A Longitudinal Study of Self-Esteem: Implications for

Adolescent Development. Journal of Youth and Adolescence 26, 117–141. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024596313925