Over the past three decades, extensive research has been conducted to explore the potential benefits of metacognition for individuals. Metacognitive training has demonstrated significant advantages not only in the context of psychotic disorders (Jeffrey et al., 2025), such as the distal effect of metacognitive training (MCT) on neurocognitive performance in psychosis, but also in learning activities. Metacognition has exhibited a positive correlation with problem-solving success (Ahdhianto et al., 2020), reading comprehension performance (Muhid, et al., 2020), and academic outcomes (Teng & Yue, 2023). Moreover, it provides opportunities for individuals to engage in authentic learning experiences and facilitates the monitoring of their personal growth and development (Ashfaq et al., 2022). 

Metacognition is commonly conceptualized as "thinking about thinking" (Flavell, 1979), while metacognitive training comprises a series of orchestrated cognitive operations that individuals employ in relation to their mental frameworks. These operations pertain to strategic approaches, knowledge bases, and skill sets, with the ultimate objective of addressing challenges, executing tasks, or attaining specified goals. To our knowledge, a comprehensive review examining the current landscape of metacognitive training methodologies in university-level education has not been conducted. This gap in the literature encompasses individuals engaged in tertiary education, irrespective of their chronological age.

A systematic review of the literature concerning metacognitive training in contemporary higher education is essential to examine its potential to enhance educational practices and to explore how individual needs are addressed by this form of training in a changing world. In line with this objective, the present structured literature review addresses five key questions:

Q1: Which components of metacognition are examined in the analyzed studies?

Q2: What metacognitive knowledge is used in training? 

Q3: Which educational field is metacognitive training most frequently employed?  

Q4: Which metacognitive theories guide the use and conception of metacognitive training?

Q5: What kinds of results are expected and obtained?

While the foundation of metacognition research lies in cognitive psychology (Akturk & Sahin, 2011), the field has since expanded to encompass diverse conceptualizations. This study specifically considers these approaches that are directly related to learning processes and their subsequent outcomes. According to Ayersman (1995), metacognition occurs as a result of individual evaluations and observations of cognitive behavior in a learning environment. Upon analyzing various definitions of metacognition within the educational field, Kadir et. al (2021) research focused on the review of metacognition, the primary common elements are metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive regulation. 

Metacognitive knowledge comprises pertinent information actively utilized in metacognitive regulation processes (Mih, 2018), and is essential for the integration and utilization of knowledge related to an individual's cognitive activity. Consequently, through the application of metacognitive knowledge, individuals can effectively manage their cognitive resources, transforming them into efficacious solutions for diverse target tasks. These resources are declarative and reflexive in nature (Brown, 1987) and can be acquired through learning processes. One essential category of metacognitive knowledge is strategic knowledge (Mih, 2018). This encompasses both knowledge regarding cognitive and metacognitive strategies applicable to task resolution and knowledge concerning the appropriate contexts for employing specific strategies. For instance, adapting to a novel professional environment characterized by the contemporary digital approach to tasks necessitates knowledge of both specific digital tools and the circumstances in which their utilization can lead to optimization. 

Metacognitive regulation encompasses activities such as planning, monitoring, and evaluating (Schraw & Moshman, 1995) which may enhance cognitive processes outcomes. 

Considering that recent years have underscored the imperative for advancements in the field of education, particularly regarding skills that enable individuals to adapt to diverse contexts, and considering the theoretical framework established thus far, the present research aims to investigate metacognitive training in contemporary higher education. 

The research design provides an integrative framework for exploring metacognitive training utilized in higher education and addressing research questions. Considering PRISMA guideline, the systematic literature review comprises four main steps: initial search, abstraction, in-depth reading, and discussion of the results. The initial search involves selecting the databases (Web of Science and Proquest), defining and implementing the search string, and filtering the papers. To enhance the quality of the research, the search process is conducted using two citation databases, Web of Science and ProQuest. The selection of these databases is justified by the multidisciplinary nature of the topic, as metacognitive training is implemented across multiple fields of study. The search strategy is identical for both databases and comprises a search string defined as: (metacognitive training) AND ("higher education" or "faculty" or "university"). The initial literature search is conducted utilizing the topic (titles, abstracts, and keywords) of the articles. The filtering process is implemented based on the selected time period (January 2020 to September 2024), accepted language (English), and peer-reviewed article parameters. The educational framework that emerged in the pandemic context provides insights into novel approaches in the educational field. The selected period corresponds directly to the significant changes resulting from the consequences of the pandemic and the post-pandemic context. The abstraction process is based on the inclusion criteria, and the selection step introduces papers for in-depth reading. The primary inclusion criteria were as follows: metacognitive training must constitute the central focus of the study, eligible documents must be directly pertinent to the educational field, the search must encompass peer-reviewed articles published between 2020 and September 2024, and eligible documents should provide relevant information to address at least one of the research questions. The exclusion criteria pertain to the presence of metacognitive training in the treatment of various disorders and the literature on interventions developed in adult programs, such as specialized courses. The abstraction process will be conducted based on predefined inclusion criteria, and the papers obtained from the selection phase will be considered for the comprehensive analysis. The total number of articles selected for in-depth reading will be analyzed, and the extraction process will provide insights guided by one of the research questions. The primary concepts undergo an exploration process that facilitates the formulation of analytical categories. Furthermore, a basic statistical analysis will be conducted to identify the most frequently addressed educational field with metacognitive forms of training.

Metacognitive training provides insights into the future educational landscape. The efficacy of metacognition-based learning has been demonstrated, and a comprehensive analysis of how such training can be developed in accordance with the requirements of the future professional environment represents a logical progression in the advancement of metacognitive pedagogy. In this context, the research outcomes will shed light on various aspects of metacognition in educational contexts, including the specific dimensions addressed during instructional methodologies and the clarification of metacognitive components employed in training programs. Additionally, this study highlights the frequency of application of these elements across different scientific fields and determines the most commonly used metacognitive approaches in higher education. Furthermore, this research may consider the potential ramifications of these theories for students’ prospective career paths while also examining both the expected and actual results of metacognitive training initiatives. The findings of the analyzed studies, both targeted and obtained, may provide valuable insights for the development of future metacognitive training programs. Furthermore, the identification of correlations between specific types of metacognitive knowledge and particular fields of study will facilitate the exploration of the potential customization of metacognitive approaches according to specific professional domains.

1.Kadir, A., Akshir, M., Yong, T., L., (2021). A review of metacognition: implications for teaching and learning. Working Paper. National Institute of Education (NIE), Singapore. 2.Ayersman, D. J. (1995). Effects of Knowledge Representation Format and Hypermedia Instruction on Metacognitive Accuracy. Computers in Human Behavior, 11(3-4), 533-555. 3. Ashfaq, M., Arif, M. I., Basit, A., & Qureshi, M. S. (2022). An investigation into relationship between metacognitive awareness and academic achievement of prospective teachers at Teacher Education Programs in Pakistan. Psychology and Education, 59(1), 354-359 4. Ahdhianto, E., Marsigit, Haryanto, & Santi, N. N. (2020). The effect of metacognitive-based contextual learning model on fifth-grade students’ problem-solving and mathematical communication skills. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(2), 753-764. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.9.2.753 5.Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, Executive Control, Self-Regulation, and Other More Mysterious Mechanisms. In F. E Brown Weinert, & R. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, Motivation, and Understanding (pp. 65-116). Hillsdale: L. Erlbaum Associates. 6.Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906 7.Jeffrey, C., Penney, D., Sauvé, G., Mendelson, D., Thibaudeau, É., Moritz, S., Hotte-Meunier, A., & Lepage, M. (2025). Does metacognitive training for psychosis (MCT) improve neurocognitive performance? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Schizophrenia Research, 275, 79–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2024.12.004 8.Mih, V. (2018). Psihologie educațională. Cluj-Napoca. Editura:ASCR. 9. Muhid, A., Amalia, E. R., Hilaliyah, H., Budiana, N., & Wajdi, M. B. N. (2020). The effect of metacognitive strategies implementation on students’ reading comprehension achievement. International Journal of Instruction, 13(2), 847-862. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13257a 10.Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351–371. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02212307 11.Teng, M. F., & Yue, M. (2022). Metacognitive writing strategies, critical thinking skills, and academic writing performance: A structural equation modeling approach. Metacognition Learning 18, 237–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-022