Study of the relationship between superego and metacognition of male and female students

Document Type : Research Paper


1 Ph.D. student of psychology, Faculty of education and psychology, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran

2 Professor of psychology, Faculty of education and psychology, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, School of Behavioral Sciences and Mental Health, Tehran Institute of Psychiatry, Tehran, Iran


Introduction: Superego and metacognition consider as two important constructs within the psychodynamic and cognitive psychology domain. The aim of this research is to examine the link between superego and metacognition among students at Ferdowsi University of Mashhad.
 Materials and Methods: This is a cross-sectional study with a correlational design conducted among students of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad in 1395. A sample of 206 male and female students was recruited from target population through convenience sampling and completed metacognitive inventory as well as Superego questionnaire. All statistical analyses were carried out using SPSS 23 statistical package. Descriptive statistics such as frequencies, means, & standard deviations as well as inferential statistics including Pearson correlation and independent t-test are applied on variables of current study.
 Results: The results indicate that there is a negative relationship between superego and metacognition (r=0.38, P< 0.001). In addition, data present a significant positive correlation between one of the superego’s subscales, conscience, and metacognition (r=0.65, P<0.0001). With regard to the superego, the results show a significant difference between men and women (t = -2.36, P=0.05). This result suggests that women have more inflexible yet powerful superego than men. Also there is a significant difference between men and women’s conscience (t=2.05, P<0.05).
 Conclusion: Metacognition is weaker among those individuals holding stronger superego and therefore, they are more susceptible to neurotic disorders. With respect to the important role of metacognitive abilities on learning and education, it can be assumed that learning and education are also influenced by superego because of its impact on metacognition.


  1. Freud S. On narcissism: an introduction. Standard edition. London: Hogarth; 1914: 67-104.
  2. Freud S. The Ego and the Id. Standard edition. London: Hogarth; 1923: 3-67.
  3. Freud S. The economic problem of masochism. Standard edition. London: Hogarth; 1924: 157-72.
  4. Freud S. Inhibitions, symptoms and anxiety. Standard edition. London: Hogarth; 1926: 77-178.
  5. Carveth DL. On the psychoanalytic sociology of Eli Sagan. Clio’s Psyche 2011; 18(3): 357-61.
  6. Carveth DL. Superego, conscience, and the nature and types of guilt. Modern Psychoanal 2010; 35(1): 106-30.
  7. Freud S. The dissolution of the oedipus complex. Standard edition. London: Hogarth; 1924: 173-82.
  8. Freud S. Some psychical consequences of the anatomical distinction between the sexes. Standard edition. London: Hogarth; 1925: 243-60.
  9. Freud S. Female sexuality. Standard edition. London: Hogarth; 1931: 223-64.
  10. Freud S. New introductory lectures on psycho-analysis (Lecture XXXIII Femininity: 112-135). Standard edition. London: Hogarth; 1933: 3-184.
  11. Gilligan C. In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1982: 24-39.
  12. Parviz K, Aghamouhamadian-Sharbaf HR, Ghanbari-Hashemabadi B, Dehghani M. [The relationship between ego strengthand metacognition among male and female students]. Educational strategy medical sciences 2016; 9(2): 118-26. (Persian)
  13. Flavell JH. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. Am Psychol 1979; 34(5): 906-11.
  14. Costa A, O'Leary P. Co-cognition: The co-operative development of the intellect. In: Davidson N, Worsham T. Enhancing thinking through co-operative learning. New York: Teachers College; 1992.
  15. Kuhn D, Dean D. A bridge between cognitive psychology and educational practice. Theor Pract 2004; 43(4): 268-73.
  16. Higgins ET. Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychol Rev 1987; 9)4(: 319-40.
  17. McLeod L. Young children and metacognition: Do we know what they know they know? And if so, what do we do about it? Aust J Earl Child 1997; 22(2): 6-11.
  18. Cross DR, Paris SG. Developmental and Instructional analyses of children’s metacognition and reading comprehension. J Educ Psychol 1988; 80(2): 131-42.
  19. Schraw G, Moshman D. Metacognitive theories. Educ Psychol Rev 1995; 7(4): 351-71.
  20. Schraw G, Crippen KJ, Hartley K. Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Res Sci Educ 2006; 36(1): 111-39.
  21. Kadivar P. Metacognitive processes and its application in teaching and learning research on education issues. Journal of psychology 2002; 5(4):87-10. (Persian)
  22. Wells A, Matthews G. Modeling cognitive in emotional: The S-REF. Behav Res Ther 1996; 34(11-12): 881-8.
  23. Wells A. The attention training technique: Theory, effects, and a metacognitive hypothesis on auditory Cogn Behav Pract 2007; 14(13): 4-8.
  24. Papageorgiou C, Wells A. An empirical test of a clinical metacognitive model of rumination and depression. Cogn Ther Res 2003; 27(2): 61-73.
  25. Cartwright-Hatton S. Wells A. Beliefs about worry and intrusions: The meta-cognitions questionnaire and its correlates. J Anxiety Disord 1997; 11(2): 79-96.
  26. Parviz K, Salehi Fadardi J. [Comparing the metacognitive process of students with- and without social phobia]. Educational strategies in medical Sciences 2015; 7(6): 405-10. (Persian)
  27. Wells A, Carter K. Further tests of a cognitive model of generalized anxiety disorder: Metacognitions and worry in GAD, panic disorder, social phobia, depression and non-patients. Behav Ther 2001; 32(15): 85-102.
  28. Bouman TK, Meijer KJ. A preliminary study of worry and meta-cognitions in hypochondriasis. Clin Psychol Psychother 1999; 6(6): 96-102.
  29. Wells A, Papageorgiou C. Relationships between worry, obsessive-compulsive symptoms and metacognitive beliefs. Behav Res Ther 1998; 39(89): 9-13.
  30. Hermans D, Engelen U, Grouwels L. Cognitive confidence in obsessive–compulsive disorder. Distrusting perception, attention and memory. Behav Res Ther 2008; 46(20): 98-113.
  31. Moritz S, Peters M, Lari F, Lincoln T. Metacognitive beliefs in obsessive-compulsive patients: a comparison with healthy and schizophrenia a participants. Cogn Psychiatr 2010; 15(12): 531-48.
  32. Bahramizadeh H. [Subscribe problematic factors in the comorbidity of anxiety and depression: the mediating role of metacognitive beliefs, anxiety sensitivity and unbearably]. MS. Dissertation. Tehran University, 2012. (Persian)
  33. Holeva Tarrier N, Wells A. Prevalence and predictors of acute PTSD following road traffic accident: Thought control strategies and social support. Behav Ther 2001; 32(17): 65-83.
  34. Roussis P, Wells A. Post-traumatic stress symptoms: tests of relationships with thought control strategies and beliefs as predicted by the metacognitive model. Pers Individ Diff 2006; 40(1): 11-22.
  35. Spada MM, Nikcevic AV, Moneta GB, Wells A. Metacognition, perceived stress, and negative emotion. Pers Individ Diff 2008; 44(11): 72-81.
  36. Samarin-Nouri Sh, Buromand-Nasab M, Falatony F, Seraj-Khorami N. Comparison of motivational beliefs and self-regulated learning strategies in gifted and normal students. New findings in psychology 2009; 4(11): 47-59.
  37. Javadi M, Keyvanara M, Yaghoubi M, Hassanzadeh A, Ebadi Z. The relationship between metacognitive awareness of reading strategies and academic achievement in students of Medical Sciences University of Isfahan. Iran J Med Educ 2010.10(3)246-54
  38. Ababaf Z. Compare cognitive and metacognitive strategies of high school students. Journal of educational innovations 2008; 7(25): 119-50.
  39. Aboulghasemi A, Kyamrsy A. The relationship between metacognition and cognitive disorders in the elderly. Advances in cognitive sciences 2009; 11(1): 8-15.
  40. Delavar A. [The research method in psychology and educational sciences]. Tehran: Virayesh; 2001. (Persian)
  41. Parviz K. An analyzing of cognitive and metacognitive strategies in learners: Interactive effect of learning environments as physical environment and location as social environment. Intern J Learn 2013; 18: 49-63.
  42. Venman MVJ, Spaans MA. Relation between intellectual and metacognitive skills: Age and task differences. Learn Individ Diff 2005; 15(2): 159-76.
  43. Williams WM, Blythe T, White N, Gandner H, Sternberg RJ. Practical intelligence for school: Developing meta-cognitive sources of achievement in Dev Rev 2002; 22(2): 162-210.
  44. Parviz K, Sharifi M. [Relationship between cognitive and metacognitive strategies and educational success in urban and rural high school students]. Iranian journal of educational strategy 2011; 4(1): 1-6. (Persian)