Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38646963›Full record

ArticleHuman brain mapping2024

The neural representation of metacognition in preferential decision-making.

Cuizhen Liu, Keqing Wang, Rongjun Yu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human brain mapping, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Cuizhen LiuSchool of Psychology, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi'an, China.ORCID 0000-0002-9569-6914
Keqing WangSchool of Psychology, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi'an, China.
Rongjun YuDepartment of Management, Marketing, and Information Systems, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong, China.ORCID 0000-0003-0123-1524

Funding

Comprehensive Reform Research and Practice Project on Graduate Education in Shaanxi Province YJSZG2023050National Natural Science Foundation of China 32300934Young Talent Fund of Xi'an Association for Science and Technology 959202313049
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Humans regularly assess the quality of their judgements, which helps them adjust their behaviours. Metacognition is the ability to accurately evaluate one's own judgements, and it is assessed by comparing objective task performance with subjective confidence report in perceptual decisions. However, for preferential decisions, assessing metacognition in preference-based decisions is difficult because it depends on subjective goals rather than the objective criterion. Here, we develop a new index that integrates choice, reaction time, and confidence report to quantify trial-by-trial metacognitive sensitivity in preference judgements. We found that the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC) and the right anterior insular were more activated when participants made bad metacognitive evaluations. Our study suggests a crucial role of the dmPFC-insula network in representing online metacognitive sensitivity in preferential decisions.

Indexed as

Brain MappingDecision MakingMagnetic Resonance ImagingMetacognitionAdultCerebral CortexChoice BehaviorFemaleHumansJudgmentMalePrefrontal CortexReaction TimeYoung Adultconfidencemetacognitionneural representationpreferential decision‐making

Identifiers

PMID38646963
PMCPMC11033923

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.