Is our ability to judge our own minds general or task-specific?

What is the broad definition of metacognition as described in this study?

Metacognition refers to the ability to monitor and control cognitive processes.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

What is the key difference between a domain-general and a domain-specific view of metacognition?

A domain-general view proposes people use a common resource to evaluate performance across tasks, whereas a domain-specific account proposes that different metacognitive components are at play in different tasks.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

What are retrospective confidence judgments (RCJs) and why are they suitable for investigating domain generality?

RCJs are self-evaluations of certainty in a given response and are appropriate because they can be applied to decisions made across a wide variety of tasks.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

How do the concepts of metacognitive bias and metacognitive sensitivity differ?

Metacognitive bias refers to the overall magnitude of judgments (such as whether an observer tends to report high or low confidence), whereas metacognitive sensitivity refers to the ability to discriminate between correct and incorrect performance.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

What distinct brain regions have been previously associated with metacognitive sensitivity in visual perception versus memory?

Visual perception metacognitive sensitivity is linked to the lateral anterior prefrontal cortex (aPFC), while memory metacognitive sensitivity is linked to the precuneus and medial aPFC.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

Why are indexes like gamma correlation or AUROC2 problematic for comparing metacognitive sensitivity across domains?

They do not control for task performance, which means spurious correlations in metacognitive sensitivity can arise due to variation in first-order performance rather than metacognitive capacity itself.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

What is metacognitive efficiency and how is it calculated in the meta-d' framework?

Metacognitive efficiency is defined as the level of metacognitive sensitivity (meta-d') relative to the subject's actual type I performance (d'), represented as the ratio meta-d' / d'.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

Why did the authors choose to use four 2AFC tasks instead of combining 2AFC with yes/no tasks?

Comparing different task structures (like 2AFC and yes/no) can obscure cross-domain correlations, particularly due to potential asymmetries in metacognitive ability for yes and no responses.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

What does previous literature generally suggest about the stability of metacognitive bias across tasks?

Previous literature widely agrees that metacognitive bias is relatively stable across tasks, with people showing correlated degrees of confidence across different types of decisions.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

What do models in both metamemory and metaperception suggest about the formation of confidence?

Both fields propose that confidence relies on first-order evidence but is also inferred from additional computations or information (second-order or postdecisional processes) that may not be used in the initial choice.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

Why did the authors recruit a relatively large sample size of N = 181?

Previous studies had small samples (23 to 52) and were underpowered to reliably detect correlations; an a priori calculation showed N = 181 is needed for correlations of 0.4 to become stable.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

What were the four cognitive tasks used in this study to evaluate metacognition?

An episodic memory task, a semantic memory task, an executive functioning task, and a visual perception task.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

How was the episodic memory task structured in this experiment?

Participants encoded 40 word pairs and later did a 2AFC retrieval test where they picked the correct word paired with a cue.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

How was the semantic memory task structured, and how were questions calibrated?

It consisted of 2AFC general knowledge questions on various topics, excluding questions that were too easy (above 95% correct) or too difficult (below 5% correct) in pretesting.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

How was the visual perception task designed?

Participants viewed two circles with dots for 700 ms and made a 2AFC decision on which circle contained more dots.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

What did the executive function task require the participants to do?

They viewed a letter-number sequence of five symbols for 1,000 ms and chose which option represented the correct sum of the numbers and relevant letters.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

Describe the confidence scale used by the participants in all four tasks.

It was an 11-point scale from 0% (representing a guess) to 100% confidence, selected using number keys and "c" for 100%.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

Why did the authors deviate from their preregistration regarding the measurement of metacognitive bias?

They did not subtract mean task performance because of potential ambiguity in how participants interpreted the "0% confident" label on a 2AFC task where chance is 50%.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI

Why did the authors reject their preregistered use of AUROC2 for measuring metacognitive sensitivity?

AUROC2 is sensitive to first-order performance, meaning cross-task correlations in metacognitive sensitivity could be driven by correlations in raw task performance rather than metacognitive capacity itself.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

Within the signal detection theory framework, what does the parameter "meta-d'" represent?

It is the type I d' that would produce the observed type II ROC curve (confidence distributions) assuming there was no noise or imprecision in the confidence estimates.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

What is the main benefit of using a hierarchical Bayesian framework (HMeta-d) to estimate metacognitive efficiency?

It constrains subject-level fits with group-level estimates, which handles uncertainty and produces stable parameter estimates even with a low number of trials (like 40 per task).

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

How did participants perform on the first-order tasks relative to one another?

Performance was best on the executive function task, followed by episodic memory, semantic memory, and lastly visual perception.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI

Which task pairings showed significant positive correlations in first-order performance (d')?

Episodic and semantic memory; executive function and semantic memory; and executive function and visual perception.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

Did participants' confidence levels differ across the tasks?

Yes, confidence mirrored the task performance: participants were most confident in executive function, followed by episodic memory, semantic memory, and least confident in visual perception.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

Did overall confidence levels correlate across tasks, and what does this imply?

Yes, significant correlations in confidence were found across all tasks (except a trend for visual/episodic), suggesting that the tendency to report high confidence is stable across domains.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI

How did metacognitive efficiency (meta-d'/d') compare across the different tasks?

Metacognitive efficiency was highest and similar for both memory tasks, which were significantly greater than both executive function and visual perception.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI

What were the main findings regarding cross-task correlations in metacognitive efficiency in the hierarchical model?

Five of six task pairings had posterior correlation 95% HDIs that did not overlap with zero, indicating substantial shared variance in metacognitive efficiency across domains.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

How do we know that correlations in metacognitive efficiency were not simply driven by similarities in task performance?

Correlations in metacognitive efficiency were significant even for task pairings that had no significant correlations in first-order performance (such as semantic memory and visual perception).

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

Which task pairing failed to show a significant correlation in metacognitive efficiency, and what was the shape of its posterior distribution?

The episodic memory and visual perception pairing had a 95% HDI that overlapped zero, but its posterior distribution still had a substantial probability mass above zero.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

How much cross-task variance in metacognitive efficiency estimates does the general metacognitive resource explain?

It explains between 7% and 48% of the variance, suggesting that both domain-general and domain-specific processes are active.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

Why might semantic memory and visual perception show higher metacognitive covariance than episodic memory and visual perception?

Both tasks may involve more easily accessible, objective, or intersubjective difficulty cues, allowing participants to utilize a domain-general metacognitive resource to build representations of task difficulty.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

What did parameter recovery simulations show regarding hierarchical vs. non-hierarchical estimation procedures?

With a low number of trials (N=40), the hierarchical model was closer to the ground truth correlation than non-hierarchical fits, though this advantage disappeared with many trials (N=400).

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI

What is one potential modeling explanation for why memory tasks show higher metacognitive efficiency than visual perception?

The one-dimensional signal detection model may be less appropriate for multidimensional memory decisions, meaning traditional SDT assumptions underfit actual confidence-accuracy relationships in memory.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified

How might a "feedback loop" boost measured metacognitive sensitivity specifically in memory tasks?

High metacognitive confidence triggers memory searches that increase the likelihood of remembering, while low confidence deters active search, making both correct and incorrect responses highly informative of accuracy.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI

What practical implications does a domain-general metacognitive resource have for real-world rehabilitation?

It suggests that training metacognitive efficiency in one specific domain (e.g., perception) could transfer to improvements in another domain (e.g., memory), aiding generalized self-awareness.

Source: Is there a G factor for metacognition? Correlations in retrospective metacognitive sensitivity across tasks · DOI · quote verified