Adults' confidence judgments track answer accuracy: confidence is higher on correct than incorrect general-knowledge trials (metacognitive monitoring)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3·i3large
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i3 Participants rated their confidence higher on trials where they selected the correct answer than on trials where they selected an incorrect answer. → Sunae Kim 2025
Evidence¶
Sunae Kim 2025¶
Sunae Kim, Paul L Harris, Benjamin Néher. (2025). Curiosity can influence metacognitive processes. Metacognition and Learning (2025) 20:39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-025-09444-y
q3 · i3 · causal · r2
Experiment 1 (65 Hungarian adults, 40 general-knowledge trials with two answer options, Qualtrics). Mixed-effects regression with participants as random effect showed higher confidence on correct trials, "F(1, 2591) = 273, p <.001" with β = 0.69; means were 73.7 (correct) vs 51.5 (incorrect).
"Participants' confidence level was higher for correct than for incorrect answers F(1, 2591) = 273, p <.001 (b = 20.22, SE = 1.22, β = 0.69)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Pre-monitoring and retrospective confidence judgments are highly consistent, with most agreement at the highest scale level regardless of correctness — related
- Adults opt out of answering more on trials they later answer incorrectly, and curiosity is higher on opted-out trials (metacognitive control) — related
- The literature is mixed on age differences in the accuracy of retrospective confidence judgments during recognition memory tests, with older adults sometimes producing more high-confidence false alarms and poorer resolution with deceptive lures — related
- Second-order metacognitive judgments of subjective uncertainty show a small high-confidence error/correct difference, smaller than curiosity ratings show — related
- Providing a standard answer to compare against improves the accuracy of students' retrospective monitoring judgments — related
- Heuristic cues — response time, familiarity, problem complexity, and context reinstating — guide opting-out decisions — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
confidence-higher-correct-than-incorrect-trials |
title |
Adults' confidence judgments track answer accuracy: confidence is higher on correct than incorrect general-knowledge trials (metacognitive monitoring) |
description |
Adults' confidence judgments track answer accuracy: confidence is higher on correct than incorrect general-knowledge trials (metacognitive monitoring) |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2025 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-19 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — sunae-kim-2025 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.