Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39231853›Full record

ArticleMemory & cognition2025

Understanding, fast and shallow: Individual differences in memory performance associated with cognitive load predict the illusion of explanatory depth.

Christian Gaviria, Javier Corredor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Memory & cognition, 2025. 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. 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

2 authors.

Christian GaviriaDepartment of Psychology, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Cr. 30 #45-03, Ed. 212, Of. 219, Bogotá, Colombia. cdgaviriam@unal.edu.co.ORCID 0000-0002-6855-1816
Javier CorredorDepartment of Psychology, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Cr. 30 #45-03, Ed. 212, Of. 219, Bogotá, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0003-0893-6332

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

People are often overconfident about their ability to explain how everyday phenomena and artifacts work (devices, natural processes, historical events, etc.). However, the metacognitive mechanisms involved in this bias have not been fully elucidated. The aim of this study was to establish whether the ability to perform deliberate and analytic processes moderates the effect of informational cues such as the social desirability of knowledge on the Illusion of Explanatory Depth (IOED). To this purpose, the participants' cognitive load was manipulated as they provided initial estimates of causal understanding of national historical events in the standard IOED paradigm. The results showed that neither the social desirability of specific causal knowledge nor the cognitive load manipulations had direct effects on the IOED. However, subsequent exploratory analyses indicated that high cognitive load was related to lower performance on concurrent memory tasks, which in turn was associated with a higher IOED magnitude. Higher analytical processing was also related to lower IOED. Implications for both dual-process models of metacognition and the design of task environments that help to reduce this bias are discussed.

Indexed as

ComprehensionIllusionsIndividualityMetacognitionThinkingAdultFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultCognitive loadExplanationIllusion of Explanatory DepthMetacognitionSocial desirability

Identifiers

PMID39231853
PMCPMC12053339

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.