Why does rereading improve metacomprehension accuracy? Evaluating the levels-of-disruption hypothesis for the rereading effect

Rereading can improve the accuracy of people’s predictions of future test perfor-mance for text material. This research investigated this rereading effect by evaluating 2 predictions from the levels-of-disruption hypothesis: (a) The rereading effect will occur when the criterion test measures comprehension of the text, and (b) the reread-ing effect will not occur when a 1-week delay occurs between initial reading and re-reading. Participants (N = 113) were assigned to 1 of 3 groups: single reading, imme-diate rereading, or rereading after a 1-week delay. Outcomes were consistent with the 2 predictions stated earlier. This article discusses the status of the levels-of-disrup-tion hypothesis and alternative hypotheses based on the cognitive effort required to process texts. Metacomprehension involves a person’s assessment of his or her own comprehen-sion of text, which is a central component of self-regulated comprehension (Hacker, 1998). The role of metacomprehension in self-regulation is illustrated when a student is studying for an upcoming exam. After reading a textbook chap-ter, the student may assess how well he or she understands each section, which in turn provides input for further regulation. For example, if the student judges that a section is not well understood, he or she may study it longer (cf. Son & Metcalfe, 2000). Accordingly, the effectiveness of self-regulated comprehension is partl