Absolute ease-of-selection judgments did not differ between homogeneous and heterogeneous problems in either age group or task¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2 · i0 negligible
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i0 Participants did not give higher EoS scores on homogeneous (M = 2.72) than heterogeneous (M = 2.64) problems, F < 1. → Marie Geurten & Patrick Lemaire 2017

Evidence¶

Marie Geurten & Patrick Lemaire 2017¶

Marie Geurten & Patrick Lemaire. (2017). Metacognition for Strategy Selection during Arithmetic Problem Solving in Young and Older Adults. https://www.google.com/search?q=Metacognition+for+Strategy+Selection+during+Arithmetic+Problem+Solving+in+Young+and+Older+Adults

q2 · i0 · causal · r2

Additional analyses of absolute EoS judgments across age groups and tasks found "did not give higher EoS scores on homogenous (M = 2.72) than on heterogeneous (M = 2.64) problems, F<1". The authors take this as suggesting participants did not use unit-digit proximity to 0 as a prospective cue.

"Results indicated that participants – whatever their age or the task – did not give higher EoS scores on homogenous (M = 2.72) than on heterogeneous (M = 2.64) problems, F<1"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Young and older adults make accurate retrospective confidence judgments but not prospective ease-of-selection judgments about their arithmetic strategy selections — related
• Collecting metacognitive judgments did not disrupt typical strategy selection and execution: both age groups selected the better strategy more on rounding-up homogeneous problems and executed rounding-down faster on homogeneous problems — related
• Retrospective metacognitive accuracy for strategy selection is higher in the selection-only task than the selection-execution task and on homogeneous than heterogeneous unit-digit problems — related