Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40555904›Full record

ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2025

Performance feedback triggers liberal detection and perceptual confidence biases in early childhood: Implications for metacognitive training.

David Soto, Marie Lallier, Kobe Desender, Patxi Elosegi

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

David SotoBasque Center on Cognition, Brain and Language, 69, 2nd Floor 20009, San Sebastian, Spain. d.soto@bcbl.eu.
Marie LallierBasque Center on Cognition, Brain and Language, 69, 2nd Floor 20009, San Sebastian, Spain.
Kobe DesenderBrain and Cognition, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Patxi ElosegiBasque Center on Cognition, Brain and Language, 69, 2nd Floor 20009, San Sebastian, Spain.

Funding

Agencia Estatal de Investigación Severo Ochoa CEX2020-001010-S
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Metacognition allows us to monitor our own mental processes and the quality of our decisions in order to promote adaptive behavior and learning across different domains. Despite its potential, the role of metacognition in children - who often exhibit confidence biases that hinder learning - has yet to be systematically evaluated. This study aimed to improve confidence judgments in 7-year-old children by means of performance feedback. Two groups of children performed a multi-letter array recognition task: one group received feedback during the task whereas the other group did not (N = 24 each, 832 trials per participant). Both groups of participants were matched on their reading performance and non-verbal IQ. Surprisingly, feedback led to more liberal detection criteria in the letter task, faster choice latencies, and increased confidence biases. Simulations from a drift-diffusion model showed that the confidence increase in the feedback group was best explained by a decrease in response latencies, originating from a reduction in non-decision time. Thus, providing children with performance feedback may speed up their responses, which in turn boosts their feeling of confidence. This study underscores the complexity of using performance feedback to enhance metacognitive monitoring in children. We highlight the need for nuanced protocols to train metacognition that bypass the influence of children's inherent confidence biases and discuss potential research directions in this regard.

Indexed as

Child DevelopmentFeedback, PsychologicalJudgmentMetacognitionChildFemaleHumansLearningMaleConfidenceFeedbackMetacognitionPerception

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.