In small-group workplace problem-solving sessions that already use delayed external artifacts and rotating roles, does combining (a) a brief individual post-session reflection with (b) the structured group-level calibration step described earlier produce additive reductions in illusions of learning and dominant-solver patterns compared with using either component alone, or do the two metacognitive routines largely overlap so that one makes the other redundant?

Answer

Combining a brief individual post-session reflection with a well-structured group-level calibration step is likely to yield partly additive but not fully independent benefits: expect small to moderate extra reductions in illusions of learning and small extra weakening of dominant-solver patterns compared with either routine alone, not redundancy.

Mechanism-wise:

• Overlap: Both routines target metacognitive calibration and can surface overconfidence, so there is some redundancy, especially for illusions of learning.
• Complementarity:
  • Individual post-session reflection creates private, accountable calibration over time and reduces social loafing.
  • Group-level calibration creates shared, social calibration in the moment and directly challenges dominant-solver dynamics.

Under at least moderate psychological safety and decent facilitation, using both together should therefore modestly outperform either alone; neither makes the other redundant.