How many questions should I answer? Using bias profiles to estimate optimal bias and maximum score on formula-scored tests

Conversational pragmatics: memory reporting strategies in different social contexts

Previous studies in conversational pragmatics have showed that the information people share with others heavily depends on the confidence they have in the correctness of a candidate answer. At the same time, different social contexts prompt different incentive structures, which set a higher or lower confidence criterion to determine which potential answer to report. In this study, we investigated how the different incentive structures of several types of social contexts and how different levels of knowledge affect the amount of information we are willing to share. Participants answered easy, intermediate, and difficult general-knowledge questions and decided whether they would report or withhold their selected answer in different social contexts: formal vs. informal, that could be either constrained (a context that promotes providing only responses we are certain about) or loose (with an incentive structure that maximizes providing any type of answer). Overall, our results confirmed that social contexts are associated with different incentive structures which affects memory reporting strategies. We also found that the difficulty of the questions is an important factor in conversational pragmatics. Our results highlight the relevance of studying different incentive structures of social contexts to understand the underlying processes of conversational pragmatics, and stress the importance of considering metamemory theories of memory reporting.

A Meta-Analysis Investigating the Association Between Metacognition and Math Performance in Adolescence

Poor math and numeracy skills are associated with a range of adverse outcomes, including reduced employability and poorer physical and mental health. Research has increasingly focused on understanding factors associated with the improvement of math skills in school. This systematic literature review and meta-analysis investigated the association between metacognition and math performance in adolescence (11–16-year-olds). A systematic search of electronic databases and grey literature (to 04.01.2020) highlighted 31 studies. The quantitative synthesis of 74 effect sizes from 29 of these studies (30 independent populations) indicated a significantly positive correlation between metacognition and math performance in adolescence (r = .37, 95% CI = [.29, .44], p < .001). There was significant heterogeneity between studies. Consideration of online (versus offline) measures of metacognition and more complex (versus simple) measures of math performance, and their combination, was associated with larger effect sizes; however, heterogeneity remained high for all analyses.

New improved gamma: Enhancing the accuracy of Goodman-Kruskal's gamma using ROC curves

For decades, researchers have debated the relative merits of different measures of people’s ability to discriminate the correctness of their own responses (resolution). The probabilistic approach, primarily led by Nelson, has advocated the Goodman–Kruskal gamma coefficient, an ordinal measure of association. The signal detection approach has advocated parametric measures of distance between the evidence distributions or the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Here we provide mathematical proof that the indices associated with the two approaches are far more similar than has previously been thought: The true value of gamma is equal to twice the true area under the ROC curve minus one. Using this insight, we report 36 simulations involving 3,600,000 virtual participants that pitted gamma estimated with the original concordance/discordance formula against gamma estimated via ROC curves and the trapezoidal rule. In all but five of our simulations—which systematically varied resolution, the number of points on the metacognitive scale, and response bias—the ROC-based gamma estimate deviated less from the true value of gamma than did the traditional estimate. Consequently, we recommend using ROC curves to estimate gamma in the future.

Comparative difficulty and the strategic regulation of accuracy: the impact of test-list context on monitoring and meta-metacognition

A growing body of research has shown that context manipulations can have little or no impact on accuracy performance, yet still significantly influence metacognitive performance. For example, participants in a test-list context paradigm study one list of words with a medium levels-of-processing task and a second word list with either a shallow or deep task: Recognition for medium words does not differ across conditions, however medium words are significantly more likely to be labeled as "remembered" (vs. merely familiar) if they had been studied with a shallow word list (Bodner & Lindsay, 2003). The goal of the current studies was to extend the test-list context paradigm to strategic regulation (report/withhold recognition test), and broaden it to incorporate different types of stimuli (i.e., face stimuli in place of a medium word list). The paradigm also was modified to include separate answer (studied/new) confidence and decision (report/withhold) confidence ratings at test. Results showed that context did not impact recognition accuracy for faces across the context conditions, however participants were more likely to report (i.e., volunteer) their face responses if they had studied the shallow word list. The results also demonstrated a difference between answer confidence and decision confidence, and the pattern of this difference depended on whether responses were reported or withheld (Experiment 1). Overall, the data are presented as support for the functional account of memory, which views memory states as inferential and attributional rather than static categories.

No pain no gain: The positive impact of punishment on the strategic regulation of accuracy

Previous studies have shown that punishing people through a large penalty for volunteering incorrect information typically leads them to withhold more information (metacognitive response bias), but it does not appear to influence their ability to distinguish between their own correct and incorrect answers (metacognitive accuracy discrimination). The goal of the current study was to demonstrate that punishing people for volunteering incorrect information-versus rewarding volunteering correct information-produces more effective metacognitive accuracy discrimination. All participants completed three different general-knowledge tests: a reward test (high points for correct volunteered answers), a baseline test (equal points/penalties for volunteered correct/incorrect answers) and a punishment test (high penalty for incorrect volunteered answers). Participants were significantly better at distinguishing between their own correct and incorrect answers on the punishment than reward test, which has implications for situations requiring effective accuracy monitoring.

Monitoring and meta-metacognition in the own-race bias

Although there is a great deal of research focused on identification issues related to own-versus other-race faces very few experiments have explored whether metacognitive monitoring contributes to the own-race bias. In the current experiment the typical own-race bias paradigm was modified so that type-2 signal detection measures (e.g. Higham & Arnold, 2007a,b) could be used to directly measure metacognitive monitoring at retrieval. A second goal of the experiment was to explore whether self-reported confidence ratings differed depending on whether they were directed at answer accuracy (e.g., judging a face as "studied") versus at decisions about that answer (e.g., volunteering vs. withholding that answer). Overall the results demonstrated that monitoring does contribute to the own-race bias, in that participants were better at monitoring their memory for own-race faces. Further, there was a significant difference between the two confidence measures, and the pattern of this difference depended on whether responses had been volunteered or withheld.

Dissociating early- and late-selection processes in recall: the mixed blessing of categorized study lists

Two experiments are reported in which we used type-2 signal detection theory to separate the effects of semantic categorization on early- and late-selection processes in free and cued recall. In Experiment 1, participants studied cue-target pairs for which the targets belonged to two, six, or 24 semantic categories, and later the participants were required to recall the targets either with (cued recall) or without (free recall) the studied cues. A confidence rating and a report decision were also required, so that we could compute both forced-report quantity and metacognitive resolution (type-2 discrimination), which served as our estimates of early- and late-selection processes, respectively. Consistent with prior research, having fewer categories enhanced the early-selection process (in performance, two > six > 24 categories). However, in contrast, the late-selection process was impaired (24 > six = two categories). In Experiment 2, encoding of paired associates, for which the targets belonged to either two or 20 semantic categories, was manipulated by having participants either form interactive images or engage in rote repetition. Having fewer categories again was associated with enhanced early selection (two > 20 categories); this effect was greater for rote repetition than for interactive imagery, and greater for free recall than for cued recall. However, late selection again showed the opposite pattern (20 > two categories), even with interactive-imagery encoding, which formed distinctive, individuated memory traces. The results are discussed in terms of early- and late-selection processes in retrieval, as well as overt versus covert recognition.

Expertise and gambling: using type 2 signal detection theory to investigate differences between regular gamblers and nongamblers

This paper presents an experimental investigation into how individuals make decisions under uncertainty when faced with different payout structures in the context of gambling. Type 2 signal detection theory was utilized to compare sensitivity to bias manipulations between regular nonproblem gamblers and nongamblers in a novel probability-based gambling task. The results indicated that both regular gamblers and nongamblers responded to the changes of rewards for correct responses (Experiment 1) and penalties for errors (Experiment 2) in setting their gambling criteria, but that regular gamblers were more sensitive to these manipulations of bias. Regular gamblers also set gambling criteria that were more optimal. The results are discussed in terms of an expertise-transference hypothesis.