Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42086731›Full record

ArticleNature human behaviour2026

Domain generality is an emergent, not inherent, property of metacognition.

Carolyn Baer, Simona Ghetti, Darko Odic

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature human behaviour, 2026. 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

3 authors.

Carolyn BaerDepartment of Psychology, Trent University, Peterborough, Ontario, Canada. carolynbaer@trentu.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4521-8006
Simona GhettiDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8282-0616
Darko OdicDepartment of Psychology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5783-2789

Funding

Gouvernement du Canada | Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (Conseil de recherches en sciences humaines du Canada) Canada Graduate ScholarshipGouvernement du Canada | Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (Conseil de recherches en sciences humaines du Canada) Insight Development GrantGouvernement du Canada | Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (Conseil de recherches en sciences humaines du Canada) Postdoctoral Fellowship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We experience some level of confidence in all decisions we make, yet our understanding of how confidence is generated remains elusive. Here we examine three potential aspects of metacognitive confidence judgements that could be similar across the distinct domains of memory and perception in adults (n = 236) and children (aged four to seven years, n = 263; 122 girls and 141 boys) from Vancouver, Canada. Using episodic memory and perceptual tasks, we reveal that while confidence bias correlates across domains at all ages, confidence sensitivity and efficiency are both distinct. Crucially, children aged six and older can flexibly contrast confidence states across memory and perceptual decisions, indicating a shared internal metric of confidence. In contrast, four-to-five-year-old children struggle with cross-domain comparisons, highlighting a developmental transition in metacognitive processing. Overall, our findings highlight the distinct yet commensurable nature of memory and perceptual confidence, with domain-general processes emerging by age six.

Indexed as

Child DevelopmentJudgmentMemory, EpisodicMetacognitionChildChild, PreschoolDecision MakingFemaleHumansMale

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.