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¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3·i3large
Currency · newest study 2018 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i3 RCJ accuracy was higher for selection-only (.67) than selection-execution (.60), and higher on homogeneous (.71) than heterogeneous (.57) problems. → Marie Geurten & Patrick Lemaire 2018
Evidence¶
Marie Geurten & Patrick Lemaire 2018¶
Geurten, M., & Lemaire, P. (2018). Metacognition for strategy selection during arithmetic problem-solving in young and older adults. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 26(3), 424–446. doi:10.1080/13825585.2018.1464114
q3 · i3 · causal · r2
ANOVA main effects on RCJ A'ROC in the same 66-participant experiment: "higher metacognitive accuracy for the selection-only task (.67) than for the selection-execution task (.60), F(1,61) = 13.39, MSe = 1.65, η²p = .17, B > 10", and homogeneous (.71) exceeded heterogeneous (.57), η²p = .42, B > 10.
"Participants also had higher metacognitive accuracy for the selection-only task (.67) than for the selection-execution task (.60), F(1,61) = 13.39, MSe = 1.65, η²p = .17, B > 10. They also had higher metacognitive accuracy on problems with homogeneous unit digits (.71) than on problems with heterogeneous unit digits (.57), F(1,61) = 45.87, MSe = 1.87, η²p = .42, B > 10"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Absolute ease-of-selection judgments did not differ between homogeneous and heterogeneous problems in either age group or task — related
- Low-confidence judgments on one problem predict better strategy selection on the immediately following problem, equally in young and older adults — related
- Older adults show higher retrospective metacognitive accuracy than young adults in the selection-only task, especially on homogeneous unit-digit problems, but comparable accuracy in the selection-execution task — 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
- Young and older adults make accurate retrospective confidence judgments but not prospective ease-of-selection judgments about their arithmetic strategy selections — related
- Eliciting confidence ratings leads to poorer metacognitive monitoring in older adults — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
task-and-problem-effects-rcj-accuracy |
title |
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 |
description |
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 |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2018 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-17 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — marie-geurten-patrick-lemaire-2018 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.