ArticleeLife2022
Reverse engineering of metacognition.
Article in eLife, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- dynConfiR: An R package for sequential sampling models of decision confidence.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Type-1 and type-2 decisions feature computational noise of similar magnitude.Communications psychology · 2026Article
- Metacognitive efficiency in learned value-based choice.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Deciding for others alters metacognition leading to responsibility aversion.Science advances · 2026Article
- Gender and anxiety reveal distinct computational sources of underconfidence.Psychological medicine · 2026Article
- Large-scale experimental investigation of the reliability of confidence measures.Communications psychology · 2025Article
- Computational characterization of metacognitive ability in subjective decision-making.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- An entropy model of decision uncertainty.Journal of mathematical psychology · 2025Article
- The confidence-noise confidence-boost (CNCB) model of confidence rating data.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Information-Theoretic Measures of Metacognition: Bounds and Relation to Group Performance.Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science · 2025Article
- Implicit manifestation of prospective metacognition in betting choices enhances its efficiency compared to explicit expression.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Human-like dissociations between confidence and accuracy in convolutional neural networks.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Confidence Is Influenced by Evidence Accumulation Time in Dynamical Decision Models.Computational brain & behavior · 2024Article
- A low-dimensional approximation of optimal confidence.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- How do humans give confidence? A comprehensive comparison of process models of perceptual metacognition.Journal of experimental psychology. General · 2024Article
- Human-like dissociations between confidence and accuracy in convolutional neural networks.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- The future of metacognition research: Balancing construct breadth with measurement rigor.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2024Review
- Expectations about precision bias metacognition and awareness.Journal of experimental psychology. General · 2023Article
- Metacognitive Information Theory.Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The human ability to introspect on thoughts, perceptions or actions - metacognitive ability - has become a focal topic of both cognitive basic and clinical research. At the same time it has become increasingly clear that currently available quantitative tools are limited in their ability to make unconfounded inferences about metacognition. As a step forward, the present work introduces a comprehensive modeling framework of metacognition that allows for inferences about metacognitive noise and metacognitive biases during the readout of decision values or at the confidence reporting stage. The model assumes that confidence results from a continuous but noisy and potentially biased transformation of decision values, described by a confidence link function. A canonical set of metacognitive noise distributions is introduced which differ, amongst others, in their predictions about metacognitive sign flips of decision values. Successful recovery of model parameters is demonstrated, and the model is validated on an empirical data set. In particular, it is shown that metacognitive noise and bias parameters correlate with conventional behavioral measures. Crucially, in contrast to these conventional measures, metacognitive noise parameters inferred from the model are shown to be independent of performance. This work is accompanied by a toolbox (
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.