Comprehensive Metacognitive Potential Questionnaire Test

How the Scales are Structured
Who Usually Takes This Test?
See How You Compare
Below is a preview of how scores are typically distributed across each scale.
Example Questions From the Test
- Not true at all
- Almost completely not true
- More not true than true
- Not sure
- More true than not true
- Almost completely true
- Completely true
- Does not apply at all
- Almost certain this does not apply
- More true than not true
- Not sure
- More true than not true
- Almost certain this applies
- Completely applies
- Does not apply at all
- Almost sure it does not apply
- Rather does not apply than applies
- Not sure
- Rather applies than does not apply
- Almost sure it applies
- Completely applies
Comprehensive Metacognitive Potential Questionnaire Test - Description and methodology of the test
People who want a structured view of how they plan, monitor, and adjust thinking can use the Comprehensive Metacognitive Potential Questionnaire Test to examine everyday cognitive habits. It suits people reflecting on learning, work, decisions, concentration, communication, and problem solving. A metacognitive assessment profile can show patterns worth developing without reducing them to a single ability label.
What This Assessment Measures
The metacognitive skills test covers these dimensions:
- Metacommunicative (10-70) measures communication control: Developing 10-29; Moderate 30-49; Strong 50-70.
- Self-Regulatory (10-70) measures behavioral/emotional regulation: Needs support 10-30; Adequate 31-50; Strong 51-70.
- Endocognitive (10-70) measures self-monitoring: Lower 10-30; Moderate 31-50; Higher 51-70.
- Metaprocedural (10-70) measures strategy control: Limited procedural awareness 10-29; Developing strategy control 30-49; Strong strategy monitoring 50-70.
- Metadeclarative (10-70) measures cognitive knowledge: Developing 10-30; Functional 31-50; Well-developed 51-70.
- Inhibitory (10-70) measures impulse control: Lower inhibition 10-29; Moderate inhibition 30-49; Higher inhibition 50-70.
- Metaregulatory (10-70) measures cognitive adjustment: Needs support 10-29; Developing 30-49; Strong 50-70.
- Metacognitive (10-70) measures thinking awareness: Developing 10-30; Functional 31-50; Advanced 51-70.
- Metacognitive Potential (80-560) measures metacognitive resources: Lower 80-239; Moderate 240-399; Higher 400-560.
Methodology and Evidence Base
Each statement uses a seven-point response continuum, moving from no fit or untruth through uncertainty to complete fit or truth. Wording varies, but respondents judge how well each statement describes them.
Responses produce separate dimension scores and an overall composite score. Displayed bands show the range for each result, not a universal ability standard. Because item weighting is undocumented, no point-per-answer rule should be inferred.
Methodologically, the questionnaire is conceptually consistent with COMP-I (Karpov & Karpov, 2022), but is not an adaptation of that published instrument. Its organization also aligns with work by Karpov, Karpov, and Filippova (2023) on performance parameters and by Karpov, Karpov, and Chemyakina (2022) on reflexivity components. As a metacognitive potential questionnaire, it is an online self-report profile, not a standardized instrument for this version.
These studies provide context rather than norms, reliability estimates, or diagnostic validation. Interpret scores as a snapshot: current demands, self-awareness, and response bias can influence answers, so one band is not a fixed description or diagnosis.
- Karpov, Anatolii V., & Karpov, Aleksandr A. (2022). The Structure of Metacognitive Regulation of Information Activity. Yaroslavl: Filigran. 816 pp. ISBN 978-5-6048593-7-7.
- Karpov, Anatolii V., Karpov, Aleksandr A., & Filippova, Yulia V. (2023). Metacognitive Determination of Performance Parameters of Programmers. Russian Psychological Journal, 20(1), 100-117. 10.21702/rpj.2023.1.7
- Karpov, Anatolii V., Karpov, Aleksandr A., & Chemyakina, Anna V. (2022). The Specifics of the Structural Organization of the Metacognitive Components of Reflexivity. Russian Psychological Journal, 19(1), 127-142. 10.21702/rpj.2022.1.10
Updated: