Correct RAPM solutions yield higher Suddenness and Certainty and lower Intuition than incorrect solutions, with a Certainty-by-difficulty interaction¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r1–r2 · q3 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i1 Correct trials yielded larger Suddenness (ΔM = 2.52) and Certainty (ΔM = 6.36) and lower Intuition (ΔM = −1.32) than incorrect trials. → Adam Chuderski 2021 q3 i? For Certainty there was a reliable item × correctness interaction, with the correct-incorrect gap decreasing from ΔM = 5.94 on the five easiest items to ΔM = 3.88 on the five hardest. → Adam Chuderski 2021 (2)

Evidence¶

Adam Chuderski 2021¶

Adam Chuderski, Jan Jastrzębski, Bartłomiej Kroczek, Hanna Kucwaj, Michał Ociepka. (2021). Metacognitive experience on Raven’s matrices versus insight problems. Metacognition and Learning 16:15–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09236-6

q3 · i1 · associational · r2

BANOVA on all 1855 rating values (1017 correct, 838 incorrect solutions) with item and correctness as fixed factors. Each correctness effect was reliable, each BF10 > 999, with ηp2 = .02 for Intuition, .05 for Suddenness, and .21 for Certainty.

"The correct trials yielded larger values of Suddenness (ΔM = 2.52) and Certainty (ΔM = 6.36), but were accompanied by lower values of Intuition ( ΔM = −1.32), as compared to the incorrect trials."

Adam Chuderski 2021 (2)¶

Adam Chuderski, Jan Jastrzębski, Bartłomiej Kroczek, Hanna Kucwaj, Michał Ociepka. (2021). Metacognitive experience on Raven’s matrices versus insight problems. Metacognition and Learning 16:15–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09236-6

q3 · i? · associational · r1

Same BANOVA: the Certainty item × correctness interaction was reliable (BF10 = 230.7), with the correct-incorrect difference dropping from ΔM = 5.94 on the five easiest items to ΔM = 3.88 on the five hardest, the latter still highly reliable (BF10 > 999).

"In contrast, for Certainty there was a reliable interaction, BF10 = 230.7. It indicated a gradual decrease of the difference in rating between the correct and incorrect trials."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Suddenness and Certainty ratings decrease as RAPM item difficulty increases, with Certainty showing a strong effect — related
• Across participants, RAPM scores correlate positively with Certainty but not with Intuition or Suddenness — related
• Intuition ratings are unaffected by RAPM item difficulty, indicating stable strategy across items — related
• Pleasure and Certainty ratings are strongly inter-correlated, questioning the independence of the subjective-experience dimensions — related
• Mean solution time almost perfectly predicts item-level Suddenness and Certainty, and fast performance signals easy items while deliberation signals hard ones — related
• The four-dimensional subjective-experience ratings are validated against classic insight and analytic problems, with Intuition and Suddenness differentiating the problem categories — related