ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Measurement of metacognition of emotional dimensions: a ROC based measurement method for metacognition of valence and arousal.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Metacognition of emotions involves accurately assessing one's emotions and the different dimensions of emotions like valence and arousal of one's emotional experience. Unlike perceptual tasks, it is difficult to determine the accuracy of our judgments of valence and arousal associated with our emotional experiences, which in turn makes it difficult to measure metacognition of emotions. Such a measurement is possible if emotional dimensions are governed by perceptual laws. We developed a novel method to classify ratings of emotional dimensions like valence and arousal as correct or incorrect based on the difference between participant's rating for a particular image and different normative ratings calculated based on the same participant's rating to other images or ratings from other participants. We report three experiments in the current study in which participants rated their valence and arousal. In the first experiment, participants provided emotion ratings and confidence judgments using a 100-point scale. Using different normative values as reference points, we constructed Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves to measure their metacognitive sensitivity. The results showed a wide range of values indicating that the emotional metacognition measure varies across individuals. In the next experiment, we used a modified version of a preexisting method using a two-alternative forced choice (2AFC) task and pre-defined stimulus category to assess its reliability and we found significant reliability across two sessions. The third experiment measured test-retest reliability for both the methods to enable comparisons. The measurement using a scale with higher resolution, participant-based accuracy judgment, and ROC based metacognition measure, designed by us, showed higher reliability across sessions for both valence and arousal. The measurement of metacognition of emotions using ROC curves and normative standards of emotions would allow us to understand mechanisms involved in emotion generation and emotion regulation as well as relationships between different dimensions of emotional experience.
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.