Metacognitive efficiency shows partial domain-general structure: strong shared metacognition between lexical decision and emotion recognition tasks¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 Metacognitive efficiency correlated strongly across the orthographic lexical decision and emotion recognition tasks (r=0.577, BF10=36.15), with substantial group-level covariance (ρ=0.842), consistent with a common metacognitive mechanism. → Ioanna Taouki 2022 q3 i? A Friedman test showed no main effect of task on metacognitive efficiency, and no pair of tasks differed significantly in group-level metacognitive efficiency. → Ioanna Taouki 2022 (2)

Evidence¶

Ioanna Taouki 2022¶

Ioanna Taouki, Marie Lallier, David Soto. (2022). The role of metacognition in monitoring performance and regulating learning in early readers. Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-022-09292-0

q3 · i2 · associational · r2

Single-subject Spearman correlations among M-ratio estimates (N=49, FDR-corrected, age and IQ covariates) showed a strong lexical decision–emotion recognition correlation; the Bayesian hierarchical model gave group-level covariance ρ=0.842, 95% HDI=[0.57, 0.99]. A weaker VA span–lexical decision correlation (r=0.355, p=0.022) had only anecdotal Bayes support.

"A strong positive correlation was observed between metacognitive efficiency on the orthographic lexical decision task and the emotion recognition task (r=0.577, p<0.001)."

Ioanna Taouki 2022 (2)¶

Ioanna Taouki, Marie Lallier, David Soto. (2022). The role of metacognition in monitoring performance and regulating learning in early readers. Metacognition and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-022-09292-0

q3 · i? · associational · r2

Task-level comparison of metacognitive efficiency across the three analysed tasks (VA span, lexical decision, emotion recognition) found no significant differences; posterior-difference HDIs for all task pairs overlapped zero (e.g., lexical decision–emotion recognition 95% HDI=[-0.42, 0.17]).

"A non -parametric Friedman test wi th task as a within -subjects factor was conducted and rendered a Chi-square value of 2.00, which showed no main effect of task on the metacognitive efficiency of the participants (p=0.368)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Metacognitive efficiency at Grade 1 predicts children's performance improvement 10 months later in both a linguistic and a non-linguistic task — related
• Numerical metacognition, but not emotion metacognition, predicts children's standardized mathematics achievement — related
• Metacognitive sensitivity increases with age between 5 and 8 years, similarly across number and emotion domains — related
• Metacognitive sensitivity is domain-specific in early childhood: number-domain and emotion-domain measures are uncorrelated — reports the opposite
• Memory metacognitive efficiency correlates with Wechsler Memory Scale scores, but perceptual metacognition does not — related