Confidence ratings do not impede category learning per se: no condition differences in training accuracy or on unambiguous and trained transfer items¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Training accuracy showed no significant main effect of condition and no condition × block interaction. → Kit S. Double 2025 q3 i? On unambiguous and trained transfer items, no pairwise condition differences were significant. → Kit S. Double 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Kit S. Double 2025¶

Kit S. Double, Micah B. Goldwater, Damian P. Birney. (2025). Reactivity to confidence ratings: evidence of impaired rule-learning. Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-025-09413-5

q3 · i? · causal · r3

Preliminary 3 (condition) × 6 (training block) mixed ANOVA on training accuracy in the full sample. Accuracy increased across blocks (main effect of block, F(5,3585) = 975.294, p <.001, ηp2 = 0.580), but condition did not differ.

"The main effect of experimental condition was not significant, F(2,707) = 0.181, p =.834, ηp2 < 0.001. The interaction between condition and block was also not significant, F(10,3535) = 1.0, p = 442, η p2 = 0.003."

Kit S. Double 2025 (2)¶

Kit S. Double, Micah B. Goldwater, Damian P. Birney. (2025). Reactivity to confidence ratings: evidence of impaired rule-learning. Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-025-09413-5

q3 · i? · causal · r3

Post-hoc comparisons (Table 3) showed no significant differences between the confidence rating, JOL, and no-rating groups on unambiguous or trained transfer items in either the full sample or the criterion-met subset; the authors' inference is quoted from the Discussion.

"Given that we found no evidence for performance differences on the training items nor the unambiguous/trained transfer items, we infer that confidence ratings do not necessarily impede category learning per se"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The confidence-rating impairment on ambiguous transfer items persists among participants who met the learning criterion
• Confidence ratings are unlikely to be an effective educational tool when knowledge transfer is the goal — related
• Eliciting confidence ratings impairs rule-based category learning compared to both no-rating and judgment-of-learning conditions on ambiguous transfer items — related
• Response-time effects are limited to slower responding in the JOL condition during the first two training blocks — related
• Reactivity differs by rating scope: item-focused confidence ratings impaired rule learning while task-focused judgments of learning did not — related