ArticleConsciousness and cognition2021
Examining the robustness of the relationship between metacognitive efficiency and metacognitive bias.
Article in Consciousness and cognition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed.
- Metacognition and metacognitive monitoring in aging.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Review
- Type-1 and type-2 decisions feature computational noise of similar magnitude.Communications psychology · 2026Article
- Interoceptive ability is uncorrelated across respiratory and cardiac axes in a large scale psychophysical study.Communications psychology · 2026Article
- Building worlds of your own: the functional role of metacognitive bias in metacognition.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Bits of confidence: Metacognition as uncertainty reduction.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Review
- How disconfirmatory evidence shapes confidence in decision-making.Communications psychology · 2025Article
- Perceptual metacognition and self-esteem: the role of feedback valence in local and global monitoring bias.BMC psychology · 2025Article
- Computational and Neuronal Basis of Visual Confidence.Annual review of vision science · 2025Review
- Product, not process: Metacognitive monitoring of visual performance during sustained attention.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Article
- Computational characterization of metacognitive ability in subjective decision-making.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Using machine learning to simultaneously quantify multiple cognitive components of episodic memory.Nature communications · 2025Article
- A comprehensive assessment of current methods for measuring metacognition.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Metacognitive deficits in major depressive disorder.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Going 'meta': a systematic review of metacognition and functional neurological disorder.Brain communications · 2025Review
- No gender difference in confidence or metacognitive ability in perceptual decision-making.iScience · 2024Article
- Challenging the Bayesian confidence hypothesis in perceptual decision-making.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Human-like dissociations between confidence and accuracy in convolutional neural networks.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Intention offloading: Domain-general versus task-specific confidence signals.Memory & cognition · 2024Article
- Reliable, rapid, and remote measurement of metacognitive bias.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- How do humans give confidence? A comprehensive comparison of process models of perceptual metacognition.Journal of experimental psychology. General · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We recently found a positive relationship between estimates of metacognitive efficiency and metacognitive bias. However, this relationship was only examined on a within-subject level and required binarizing the confidence scale, a technique that introduces methodological difficulties. Here we examined the robustness of the positive relationship between estimates of metacognitive efficiency and metacognitive bias by conducting two different types of analyses. First, we developed a new within-subject analysis technique where the original n-point confidence scale is transformed into two different (n-1)-point scales in a way that mimics a naturalistic change in confidence. Second, we examined the across-subject correlation between metacognitive efficiency and metacognitive bias. Importantly, for both types of analyses, we not only established the direction of the effect but also computed effect sizes. We applied both techniques to the data from three tasks from the Confidence Database (N > 400 in each). We found that both approaches revealed a small to medium positive relationship between metacognitive efficiency and metacognitive bias. These results demonstrate that the positive relationship between metacognitive efficiency and metacognitive bias is robust across several analysis techniques and datasets, and have important implications for future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.