Two experiments tested whether differences in problem-solving strategies influence the ability of people to monitor their problem-solving effectiveness as measured by confidence judgments. On multiple choice problems, people tend to use either a constructive matching strategy, whereby they attempt to solve a problem before looking at the response options, or a response elimination strategy, whereby they work backward from response options trying to find one that fits as a solution. Constructive matching gives rise to different cues that may enhance confidence monitoring. Experiment 1 showed that spontaneous constructive matching in nonverbal spatial reasoning problems was associated with better confidence calibration and resolution than response elimination. We manipulated strategy in Experiment 2 by requiring constructive matching and found improved monitoring. Implications for research on monitoring, overconfidence, and the association between skill and monitoring are discussed. (Contains 4 figures, 4 footnotes and 2 tables.)