Abstract
The influential metacognitive framework of Nelson and Narens (1990) distinguishes between object-level and meta-level, with two metacognitive processes, monitoring and control, governing the interplay between them. Monitoring refers to the process by which the meta-level tracks the accuracy of object level-performance, whereas control refers to the processes by which the meta-level regulates object-level processes. In this study, I examine the prediction derived from Koriat’s (Psychological Review, 119, 80–113 2012a) self-consistency model (SCM) that when people indicate their confidence in the accuracy of their choice, their confidence actually monitors the likelihood that others will make the same choice better than the accuracy of that choice. This was shown to be the case for three levels of processing: choosing the correct option, predicting the choice made by others, and predicting the predictions made by others about the majority choice. The conditions under which object-level correspondence and same-level correspondence are aligned or diverge are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ackerman, R., & Goldsmith, M. (2011). Control over grain size in memory reporting—With and without satisficing knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 1224–1245. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012938.
Ackerman, R., & Koriat, A. (2011). Response latency as a predictor of the accuracy of children’s reports. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17, 406–417. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025129.
Alba, J. W., & Marmorstein, H. (1987). The effects of frequency knowledge on consumer decision making. Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 14–25. https://doi.org/10.1086/209089.
Ariel, R., Dunlosky, J., & Bailey, H. (2009). Agenda-based regulation of study-time allocation: When agendas override item-based monitoring. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138, 432–447. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015928.
Armelius, K. (1979). Task predictability and performance as determinants of confidence in multiple-cue judgments. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 20, 19–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.1979.tb00678.
Bajšanski, I., Žauhar, V., & Valerjev, P. (2019). Confidence judgments in syllogistic reasoning: The role of consistency and response cardinality. Thinking & Reasoning, 25(1), 14–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2018.1464506.
Baranski, J. V., & Petrusic, W. M. (1998). Probing the locus of confidence judgments: Experiments on the time to determine confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 929–945. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.24.3.929.
Barr, D. J., & Keysar, B. (2005). Mindreading in an exotic case: The normal adult human. In B. F. Malle & S. D. Hodges (Eds.), Other minds: How humans bridge the divide between self and other (pp. 271–283). New York: Guilford Press.
Benjamin, A. S. (2008). Memory is more than just remembering: Strategic control of encoding, accessing memory, and making decisions. In A. S. Benjamin & B. H. Ross (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Skill and strategy in memory use (Vol. 48, pp. 175–223). London: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(07)48005-7.
Benjamin, A. S., & Bjork, R. A. (1996). Retrieval fluency as a metacognitive index. In L. M. Reder (Ed.), Implicit memory and metacognition (pp. 309–338). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Benjamin, A. S., Bjork, R. A., & Schwartz, B. L. (1998). The mismeasure of memory: When retrieval fluency is misleading as a metamnemonic index. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 55–68. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.127.1.55.
Benjamin, A. S., & Diaz, M. (2008). Measurement of relative metamnemonic accuracy. In J. Dunlosky & R. A. Bjork (Eds.), Handbook of memory and metamemory (pp. 73–94). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417–444. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143823.
Brewer, W. F., & Sampaio, C. (2006). Processes leading to confidence and accuracy in sentence recognition: A metamemory approach. Memory, 14, 540–552. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210600590302.
Brewer, W. F., & Sampaio, C. (2012). The metamemory approach to confidence: A test using semantic memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 67, 59–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.04.002.
Brewer, W. F., Sampaio, C., & Barlow, M. R. (2005). Confidence and accuracy in the recall of deceptive and nondeceptive sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 618–627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.01.017.
Brunswik, E. (1955). Representative design and probabilistic theory in a functional psychology. Psychological Review, 62, 193–217. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0047470.
Chandler, C. C. (1994). Studying related pictures can reduce accuracy, but increase confidence in a modified recognition test. Memory & Cognition, 22, 273–280. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200854.
DeSoto, K. A., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2014). Positive and negative correlations between confidence and accuracy for the same events in recognition of categorized lists. Psychological Science, 25, 781–788. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613516149.
Dhami, M. K., Hertwig, R., & Hoffrage, U. (2004). The role of representative design in an ecological approach to cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 959–988. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.6.959.
Dunlosky, J., & Hertzog, C. (1998). Training programs to improve learning in later adulthood: Helping older adults educate themselves. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 249–276). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dunlosky, J., & Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dunning, D. (2007). Prediction: The inside view. In E. T. Higgins & A. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 69–90). New York: Guilford.
Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., & Lichtenstein, S. (1977). Knowing with certainty: The appropriateness of extreme confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 552–564. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.3.4.552.
Fleming, S. M., & Lau, H. C. (2014). How to measure metacognition. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 443. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00443.
Gigerenzer, G., Hoffrage, U., & Kleinbölting, H. (1991). Probabilistic mental models: A Brunswikian theory of confidence. Psychological Review, 98, 506–528. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.4.506.
Gill, M. J., Swann, W. B., Jr., & Silvera, D. H. (1998). On the genesis of confidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1101–1114. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.5.1101.
Goldsmith, M., & Koriat, A. (2008). The strategic regulation of memory accuracy and informativeness. In A. Benjamin & B. Ross (Eds.), Psychology of learning and motivation (Memory use as skilled cognition) (Vol. 48, pp. 1–60). San Diego, CA: Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0079-7421(07)48001-x.
Higham, P. A., Perfect, T. J., & Bruno, D. (2009). Investigating strength and frequency effects in recognition memory using type-2 signal detection theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 57–80. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013865.
Hoffrage, U., & Hertwig, R. (2006). Which world should be represented in representative design? In K. Fiedler & P. Juslin (Eds.), Information sampling and adaptive cognition (pp. 381–408). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Juslin, P. (1994). The overconfidence phenomenon as a consequence of informal experimenter-guided selection of almanac items. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 57, 226–246. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1994.1013.
Kelley, C. M., & Lindsay, D. S. (1993). Remembering mistaken for knowing: Ease of retrieval as a basis for confidence in answers to general knowledge questions. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1993.1001.
Keynes, J. M. (1936). The general theory of employment, interest and money. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace and Company.
Koriat, A. (1976). Another look at the relationship between phonetic symbolism and the feeling of knowing. Memory & Cognition, 4, 244–248. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213170.
Koriat, A. (1993). How do we know that we know? The accessibility model of the feeling of knowing. Psychological Review, 100, 609–639. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.100.4.609.
Koriat, A. (1995). Dissociating knowing and the feeling of knowing: Further evidence for the accessibility model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 311–333. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.124.3.311.
Koriat, A. (2008a). Easy comes, easy goes? The link between learning and remembering and its exploitation in metacognition. Memory & Cognition, 36, 416–428. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.36.2.416.
Koriat, A. (2008b). Subjective confidence in one’s answers: The consensuality principle. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 945–959. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.34.4.945.
Koriat, A. (2011). Subjective confidence in perceptual judgments: A test of the self-consistency model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140, 117–139. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022171.
Koriat, A. (2012a). The self-consistency model of subjective confidence. Psychological Review, 119, 80–113. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025648.
Koriat, A. (2012b). When are two heads better than one and why? Science, 336, 360–362. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1216549.
Koriat, A. (2013). Confidence in personal preferences. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26, 247–259. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.1758.
Koriat, A. (2015). When two heads are better than one and when they can be worse: The amplification hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144, 934–950. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000092.
Koriat, A. (2016). Metacognition: Decision-making processes in self-monitoring and self-regulation. In G. Keren & G. Wu (Eds.), (Vol. 1, pp. 356–379). Malden, MA: Wiley–Blackwell.
Koriat, A. (2017). Can people identify “deceptive” or “misleading” items that tend to produce mostly wrong answers? Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 30, 1066–1077. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2024.
Koriat, A. (2018). When reality is out of focus: Can people tell whether their beliefs and judgments are correct or wrong? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147, 613–631. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000397.
Koriat, A., Ackerman, R., Lockl, K., & Schneider, W. (2009a). The easily learned, easily-remembered heuristic in children. Cognitive Development, 24, 169–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2009.01.001.
Koriat, A., Ackerman, R., Lockl, K., & Schneider, W. (2009b). The memorizing-effort heuristic in judgments of learning: A developmental perspective. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 102, 265–279. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016374.
Koriat, A., & Adiv, S. (2016). The self-consistency theory of subjective confidence. In J. Dunlosky & S. Tauber (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of metamemory (pp. 127–147). New York: Oxford.
Koriat, A., Adiv, S., & Schwarz, N. (2016). Views that are shared with others are expressed with greater confidence and greater fluency independent of any social influence. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 20, 176–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868315585269.
Koriat, A., Adiv-Mashinsky, S., Undorf, M., & Schwarz, N. (2018). The prototypical majority effect under social influence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(5), 670–683. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217744527.
Koriat, A., & Bjork, R. A. (2005). Illusions of competence in monitoring one’s knowledge during study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 187–194. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.31.2.187.
Koriat, A., & Bjork, R. A. (2006). Illusions of competence during study can be remedied by manipulations that enhance learners’ sensitivity to retrieval conditions at test. Memory & Cognition, 34, 959–972. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193244.
Koriat, A., Fiedler, K., & Bjork, R. A. (2006). Inflation of conditional predictions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 429–447. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.135.3.429.
Koriat, A., & Goldsmith, M. (1996). Monitoring and control processes in the strategic regulation of memory accuracy. Psychological Review, 103, 490–517. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.103.3.490.
Koriat, A., Pansky, A., & Goldsmith, M. (2011). An output-bound perspective on false memories: The case of the Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm. In A. Benjamin (Ed.), Successful remembering and successful forgetting: A Festschrift in honor of Robert a. Bjork (pp. 297–328). London, UK: Psychology Press.
Koriat, A., & Sorka, H. (2017). The construction of category membership judgments: Towards a distributed model. In H. Cohen & C. Lefebvre (Eds.), Handbook of categorization in cognitive science (2nd ed., pp. 773–794). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.
Kurdi, B., Diaz, A. J., Wilmuth, C. A., Friedman, M. C., & Banaji, M. R. (2018). Variations in the relationship between memory confidence and memory accuracy: The effects of spontaneous accessibility, list length, modality, and complexity. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice, 5, 3–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/cns0000117.
Lichtenstein, S., Fischhoff, B., & Phillips, L. D. (1982). Calibration of probabilities: The state of the art to 1980. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 306–334). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Maniscalco, B., & Lau, H. (2014). Signal detection theory analysis of type 1 and type 2 data: Meta-d’, response-specific meta-d’, and the unequal variance SDT model. In S. M. Fleming & C. D. Frith (Eds.), The cognitive neuroscience of metacognition (pp. 25–66). Berlin, Germany: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-45190-4_3.
Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognitive judgments and control of study. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 159–163. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01628.x.
Metcalfe, J., & Finn, B. (2008). Evidence that judgments of learning are causally related to study choice. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15, 174–179. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.1.174.
Metcalfe, J., & Kornell, N. (2003). The dynamics of learning and allocation of study time to a region of proximal learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 530–542. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.132.4.530.
Nelson, T. O. (1984). A comparison of current measures of the accuracy of feeling-of-knowing predictions. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 109–133. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.95.1.109.
Nelson, T. O., & Leonesio, R. J. (1988). Allocation of self-paced study time and the “labor-in-vain effect.”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 76–686. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.14.4.676.
Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 1–45). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1994). Why investigate metacognition? In J. Metcalfe & A. P. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 1–25). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Pansky, A., & Goldsmith, M. (2014). Metacognitive effects of initial question difficulty on subsequent memory performance. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 1255–1262. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0597-2.
Pulford, B. D., Colman, A. M., Buabang, E. K., & Krockow, E. M. (2018). The persuasive power of knowledge: Testing the confidence heuristic. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147, 1431–1444. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000471.
Rhodes, M. G. (2016). Judgments of learning: Methods, data, and theory. In J. Dunlosky & S. K. Tauber (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Metamemory (pp. 65–80). New York: Oxford UP.
Rhodes, M. G., & Castel, A. D. (2008). Memory predictions are influenced by perceptual information: Evidence for metacognitive illusions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 615–625. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013684.
Robinson, M. D., Johnson, J. T., & Herndon, F. (1997). Reaction time and assessments of cognitive effort as predictors of eyewitness memory accuracy and confidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 416–425. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.3.416.
Roediger, H. L., & DeSoto, K. A. (2015). Understanding the relation between confidence and accuracy in reports from memory. In S. D. Lindsay, C. M. Kelley, A. P. Yonelinas, & H. L. Roediger III (Eds.), Remembering: Attributions, processes, and control in human memory: Papers in honor of Larry L. Jacoby (pp. 347–367). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Roediger, H. L., III, & McDermott, K. B. (1995). Creating false memories: Remembering words not presented in lists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 803–814. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.21.4.803.
Rubinsten, O., Anaki, D., Henik, A., Drori, S., & Faran, Y. (2005). Norms for free associations in the Hebrew language. In A. Henik, O. Rubinsten, & D. Anaki (Eds.), Word norms for the Hebrew language (in Hebrew) (pp. 17–34). Ben Gurion University of the Negev.
Sampaio, C., & Brewer, W. F. (2009). The role of unconscious memory errors in judgments of confidence for sentence recognition. Memory & Cognition, 37, 158–163. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.37.2.158.
Sampaio, C., Reinke, V., Mathews, J., Swart, A., & Wallinger, S. (2017). High confidence in falsely recognizing prototypical faces. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 71, 1348–1356. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2017.1329844.
Slovic, P. (1966). Cue-consistency and cue-utilization in judgment. The American Journal of Psychology, 79, 427–434. https://doi.org/10.2307/1420883.
Son, L. K., & Metcalfe, J. (2000). Metacognitive and control strategies in study-time allocation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 204–221. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.26.1.204.
Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M. C. M., & Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 66–73. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.66.
Thiede, K. W., & Dunlosky, J. (1999). Toward a general model of self-regulated study: An analysis of selection of items for study and self-paced study time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 1024–1037. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.25.4.1024.
Tullis, J. G. (2018). Predicting others’ knowledge: Knowledge estimation as cue utilization. Memory & Cognition, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3758/s1342.
Tullis, J. G., & Benjamin, A. S. (2011). On the effectiveness of self-paced learning. Journal of Memory and Language, 64, 109–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2010.11.002.
Unkelbach, C. (2006). The learned interpretation of cognitive fluency. Psychological Science, 17, 339–345. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01708.x.
Van Swol, L. M., & Sniezek, J. A. (2005). Factors affecting the acceptance of expert advice. British Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 443–461. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466604X17092.
Weidemann, C. T., & Kahana, M. J. (2016). Assessing recognition memory using confidence ratings and response times. Royal Society Open Science, 3, 150670. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150670.
Funding
The preparation of this article was supported by Grant 2013039 from the United States—Israel Binational Science Foundation to Asher Koriat and Norbert Schwarz. I am grateful to Miriam Gil for her help in the analyses of the results, and to Etti Levran (Merkine) for her help in copyediting.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic supplementary material
ESM 1
(DOCX 15.2 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Koriat, A. Confidence judgments: The monitoring of object-level and same-level performance. Metacognition Learning 14, 463–478 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-019-09195-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-019-09195-7