Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34720771›Full record

ArticleMetacognition and learning2021

Are children's judgments of another's accuracy linked to their metacognitive confidence judgments?

Carolyn Baer, Puja Malik, Darko Odic

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Metacognition and learning, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

3 authors.

Carolyn BaerDepartment of Psychology, University of British Columbia, 2136 West Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4 Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4521-8006
Puja MalikDepartment of Psychology, University of British Columbia, 2136 West Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4 Canada.
Darko OdicDepartment of Psychology, University of British Columbia, 2136 West Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4 Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5783-2789

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The world can be a confusing place, which leads to a significant challenge: how do we figure out what is true? To accomplish this, children possess two relevant skills: reasoning about the likelihood of their own accuracy (metacognitive confidence) and reasoning about the likelihood of others' accuracy (mindreading). Guided by Signal Detection Theory and Simulation Theory, we examine whether these two self- and other-oriented skills are one in the same, relying on a single cognitive process. Specifically, Signal Detection Theory proposes that confidence in a decision is purely derived from the imprecision of that decision, predicting a tight correlation between decision accuracy and confidence. Simulation Theory further proposes that children attribute their own cognitive experience to others when reasoning socially. Together, these theories predict that children's self and other reasoning should be highly correlated and dependent on decision accuracy. In four studies ( SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11409-021-09263-x.

Indexed as

ConfidenceIndividual differencesSelective social learningSignal detection theorySimulation theory

Identifiers

PMID34720771
PMCPMC8550463

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.