Recalling past confidence versus doubt validates or invalidates thoughts and shifts GRE performance accordingly¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3 · i1–i2
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 In Study 3 (N = 304), the Thought Valence × Validity interaction on GRE performance was significant, F(1, 300) = 11.152, p = .001, ηp² = .036. → Moreno 2022 q3 i1 Positive thoughts improved performance under validation (M = 13.78) versus invalidation (M = 12.32), p = .009; negative thoughts decreased performance under validation (M = 11.82) versus invalidation (M = 13.03), p = .037. → Moreno 2022 (2)

Evidence¶

Moreno 2022¶

Moreno, L., Briñol, P., & Petty, R. E. (2022). Metacognitive Confidence Can Increase but Also Decrease Performance in Academic Settings. Metacognition and Learning, 17, 139–165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-021-09270-y

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

Study 3 randomly assigned 304 undergraduates to list positive or negative student-quality thoughts, then recall a past episode of confidence or doubt, before completing 30 GRE multiple-choice questions. The predicted interaction was significant with printed effect size ηρ2 = .036.

"The results showed the predicted significant interaction between thought valence and validity of thoughts, F (1, 300) = 11.152, p = .001, ηρ2 = .036 (see Fig. 3)."

Moreno 2022 (2)¶

Moreno, L., Briñol, P., & Petty, R. E. (2022). Metacognitive Confidence Can Increase but Also Decrease Performance in Academic Settings. Metacognition and Learning, 17, 139–165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-021-09270-y

q3 · i1 · causal · r2

Within positive-thought participants in Study 3, validation produced higher GRE scores than invalidation (F(1, 300) = 6.963, p = .009, printed effect size ηρ2 = .023); the mirror effect for negative thoughts was also significant (F(1, 300) = 4.395, p = .037, ηρ2 = .014).

"generating positive thoughts improved performance when validation of those positive thoughts was manipulated to be high (M = 13.78, SD = 4.02, 95% CI = [12.97, 14.58]) rather than low ( M = 12.32, SD = 3.24, 95% CI = [11.59, 13.05]), F (1, 300) = 6.963, p = .009, η ρ2 = .023."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Metacognitive confidence moderates the effect of thought valence on academic performance: confidence amplifies positive thoughts' benefits and negative thoughts' harm
• Experimentally manipulated thought validation amplifies the performance impact of self-relevant thoughts on a geometric shapes task
• Perceived thought validity mediates the effect of the confidence induction on performance