Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30596440›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental psychology. General2019

Domain-general enhancements of metacognitive ability through adaptive training.

Jason Carpenter, Maxine T Sherman, Rogier A Kievit, Anil K Seth, Hakwan Lau, Stephen M Fleming

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental psychology. General, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

59 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Towards an integrative neuroscience of metacognition.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Metacognitive training facilitates optimal cognitive offloading.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Computational and Neuronal Basis of Visual Confidence.Annual review of vision science · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Online self-evaluation of fMRI-based neurofeedback performance.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024
    Article
  18. Neural Correlates of Metacognition Impairment in Opioid Addiction.Biological psychiatry. Cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging · 2024
    Article
  19. Metacognition as a window into subjective affective experience.Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2024
    Review
  20. The future of metacognition research: Balancing construct breadth with measurement rigor.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2024
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jason CarpenterWellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, University College London.
Maxine T ShermanSackler Centre for Consciousness Science and School of Engineering and Informatics, University of Sussex.
Rogier A KievitMax Planck University College London Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing Research, University College London.
Anil K SethSackler Centre for Consciousness Science and School of Engineering and Informatics, University of Sussex.
Hakwan LauDepartment of Psychology and Brain Research Institute, University of California, Los Angeles.
Stephen M FlemingWellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging, University College London.ORCID 0000-0003-0233-4891

Funding

Neural basis of metacognitionR01NS088628 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI FLEMING, STEPHEN MICHAEL, LAU, HAKWAN · 2014 to 2018
$1.7M
Medical Research Council MC_UP_1401/1Medical Research Council MC_UU_00005/9National Institutes of Health; National Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNINDS NIH HHS R01 NS088628Wellcome Trust 206648/Z/17/ZWellcome Trust; Royal Society
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The metacognitive ability to introspect about self-performance varies substantially across individuals. Given that effective monitoring of performance is deemed important for effective behavioral control, intervening to improve metacognition may have widespread benefits, for example in educational and clinical settings. However, it is unknown whether and how metacognition can be systematically improved through training independently of task performance, or whether metacognitive improvements generalize across different task domains. Across 8 sessions, here we provided feedback to two groups of participants in a perceptual discrimination task: an experimental group (n = 29) received feedback on their metacognitive judgments, while an active control group (n = 32) received feedback on their decision performance only. Relative to the control group, adaptive training led to increases in metacognitive calibration (as assessed by Brier scores), which generalized both to untrained stimuli and an untrained task (recognition memory). Leveraging signal detection modeling we found that metacognitive improvements were driven both by changes in metacognitive efficiency (meta-d'/d') and confidence level, and that later increases in metacognitive efficiency were positively mediated by earlier shifts in confidence. Our results reveal a striking malleability of introspection and indicate the potential for a domain-general enhancement of metacognitive abilities. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Indexed as

Models, PsychologicalPractice, PsychologicalTask Performance and AnalysisAdultFeedback, PsychologicalFemaleHumansMaleMetacognitionMiddle AgedYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID30596440
PMCPMC6390881

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.