Comparing Processing-based, Stimulus-based, and Subject-based Factors in Metacognition

Abstract

We investigated the reliability of individual differences in metacognitive accuracy in two experiments, examining within-subjects performance on 4 different tasks: (a) ease of learning judgments, (b) feeling of knowing judgments, (c) judgments of learning, and (d) text comprehension monitoring. In addition, we tested the same individuals twice (with a one-week delay). If a general metacognitive factor exists, we would expect to find reliable correlations between metacognitive accuracy across the four tasks. Additionally, we would expect significant test-retest correlations: metacognitive accuracy on a given task should be consistent even if the tests are separated by a one-week delay. Although individual differences in memory and confidence were stable across both sessions and tasks, differences in metacognitive accuracy were not. These results argue against the notion of general metacognitive factor.