ArticleNature communications2025
A comprehensive assessment of current methods for measuring metacognition.
Article in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 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
31 citing papers in PubMed.
- Towards an integrative neuroscience of metacognition.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2026Review
- Cognitive Control and Metacognition: The Effect of Interference, Working-Memory Load, and Shifting on Confidence in Response Correctness and Partial Error.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Metacognition and metacognitive monitoring in aging.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Review
- Prior Expectations Bias Confidence Judgments Through Parietal Alpha-Band Modulation.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Comparing Aha! Moments in Problem Solving and Generative Ideation.Journal of Intelligence · 2026Article
- Domain generality is an emergent, not inherent, property of metacognition.Nature human behaviour · 2026Article
- The effect of the philosophy for children (P4C) education program in out-of-school learning settings on preschool children's executive functioning skills.BMC pediatrics · 2026Article
- Adaptive yet suboptimal integration of advice in decision-making.Communications psychology · 2026Article
- Perceptual sensitivity, but not metacognitive monitoring, is shaped by increases and decreases in control.Experimental brain research · 2026Article
- 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
- Measurement of metacognition of emotional dimensions: a ROC based measurement method for metacognition of valence and arousal.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Explore thyself: is it time for metacognition screening in clinical trials?Clinical parkinsonism & related disorders · 2026Review
- Developing and Refining a Knowledge Assessment Instrument for Individuals Involved in Managing Occupational Heat Stress: Paper A.American journal of industrial medicine · 2025Article
- Bits of confidence: Metacognition as uncertainty reduction.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Review
- Large-scale experimental investigation of the reliability of confidence measures.Communications psychology · 2025Article
- Acute Effects of Portable Dry-EEG Neurofeedback on Classical Chinese Learning: A Three-Arm Repeated-Measures Study.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
- Computational and Neuronal Basis of Visual Confidence.Annual review of vision science · 2025Review
- Brain stimulation over dorsomedial prefrontal cortex causally affects metacognitive bias but not mentalising.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2025Article
- Optimal metacognitive decision strategies in signal detection theory.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Review
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
Abstract
One of the most important aspects of research on metacognition is the measurement of metacognitive ability. However, the properties of existing measures of metacognition have been mostly assumed rather than empirically established. Here I perform a comprehensive empirical assessment of 17 measures of metacognition. First, I develop a method of determining the validity and precision of a measure of metacognition and find that all 17 measures are valid and most show similar levels of precision. Second, I examine how measures of metacognition depend on task performance, response bias, and metacognitive bias, finding only weak dependences on response and metacognitive bias but many strong dependencies on task performance. Third, I find that all measures have very high split-half reliabilities, but most have poor test-retest reliabilities. This comprehensive assessment paints a complex picture: no measure of metacognition is perfect and different measures may be preferable in different experimental contexts.
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.