Children's metacognitive judgments are not explained by baseline risk preferences or response-time cues¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r1–r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2017: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Baseline risk preferences were not correlated with phi, gamma, or A'ROC in either condition. → Vo 2014 q3 i? Phi remained significant when controlling for discrimination response time, suggesting confidence judgments rely on internal uncertainty representations. → Vo 2014 (2)

Evidence¶

Vo 2014¶

Vo, V. Y., Li, R., Kornell, N., Pouget, A., & Cantlon, J. F. (2014). Young Children Bet On Their Numerical Skills: Metacognition in the Numerical Domain. Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614538458

q3 · i? · associational · r2

Correlations between risk preference scores and all three metacognition measures were non-significant in both tasks (e.g., phi-number r = .03, p = .86; A'ROC-emotion r = .22, p = .19; Table 2).

"Children's baseline risk preferences were not correlated with phi for either condition (Table 2). This indicates that children's metacognitive judgments were not dominated by generic risk-seeking or risk aversive behaviors."

Vo 2014 (2)¶

Vo, V. Y., Li, R., Kornell, N., Pouget, A., & Cantlon, J. F. (2014). Young Children Bet On Their Numerical Skills: Metacognition in the Numerical Domain. Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614538458

q3 · i? · associational · r1

Phi computed as a partial correlation controlling for discrimination response time remained significant in both conditions, suggesting children's confidence judgments depended on an internal representation of uncertainty independent of response time.

"The phi correlation remained significant for both conditions (number: M = 0.21, t(40) = 6.26, p < .001; emotion: M = 0.17, t(42) = 4.80, p < .001)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Children aged 5 to 8 show metacognitive sensitivity in a nonverbal wagering task, betting more on correct than incorrect discriminations — related
• Metacognitive sensitivity increases with age between 5 and 8 years, similarly across number and emotion domains — related
• Numerical metacognition, but not emotion metacognition, predicts children's standardized mathematics achievement — related
• Performance-resolution correlation is significant in 2AFC but much smaller and mostly non-significant in free-response testing — related
• Young children maintain correct responses more easily than they withdraw incorrect responses on an L2 vocabulary task — related
• Metacognitive sensitivity is domain-specific in early childhood: number-domain and emotion-domain measures are uncorrelated — related
• Summary-statistic measures of metacognitive accuracy (gamma, type 2 ROC, meta-d′, meta-da) maintain a false positive rate consistent with the nominal 5% alpha level in group comparisons — related