A comprehensive assessment of current methods for measuring metacognition
Abstract One of the most important aspects of research on metacognition is the measurement of metacognitive ability. However, the properties of existing measures of metacognition have been mostly assumed rather than empirically established. Here I perform a comprehensive empirical assessment of 17 m...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nature Portfolio
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | Nature Communications |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-56117-0 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832594531184279552 |
|---|---|
| author | Dobromir Rahnev |
| author_facet | Dobromir Rahnev |
| author_sort | Dobromir Rahnev |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract One of the most important aspects of research on metacognition is the measurement of metacognitive ability. However, the properties of existing measures of metacognition have been mostly assumed rather than empirically established. Here I perform a comprehensive empirical assessment of 17 measures of metacognition. First, I develop a method of determining the validity and precision of a measure of metacognition and find that all 17 measures are valid and most show similar levels of precision. Second, I examine how measures of metacognition depend on task performance, response bias, and metacognitive bias, finding only weak dependences on response and metacognitive bias but many strong dependencies on task performance. Third, I find that all measures have very high split-half reliabilities, but most have poor test-retest reliabilities. This comprehensive assessment paints a complex picture: no measure of metacognition is perfect and different measures may be preferable in different experimental contexts. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-192a33dc4b9e4117967c9ef9333b5995 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2041-1723 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-01-01 |
| publisher | Nature Portfolio |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Nature Communications |
| spelling | doaj-art-192a33dc4b9e4117967c9ef9333b59952025-01-19T12:30:40ZengNature PortfolioNature Communications2041-17232025-01-0116111910.1038/s41467-025-56117-0A comprehensive assessment of current methods for measuring metacognitionDobromir Rahnev0School of Psychology, Georgia Institute of TechnologyAbstract One of the most important aspects of research on metacognition is the measurement of metacognitive ability. However, the properties of existing measures of metacognition have been mostly assumed rather than empirically established. Here I perform a comprehensive empirical assessment of 17 measures of metacognition. First, I develop a method of determining the validity and precision of a measure of metacognition and find that all 17 measures are valid and most show similar levels of precision. Second, I examine how measures of metacognition depend on task performance, response bias, and metacognitive bias, finding only weak dependences on response and metacognitive bias but many strong dependencies on task performance. Third, I find that all measures have very high split-half reliabilities, but most have poor test-retest reliabilities. This comprehensive assessment paints a complex picture: no measure of metacognition is perfect and different measures may be preferable in different experimental contexts.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-56117-0 |
| spellingShingle | Dobromir Rahnev A comprehensive assessment of current methods for measuring metacognition Nature Communications |
| title | A comprehensive assessment of current methods for measuring metacognition |
| title_full | A comprehensive assessment of current methods for measuring metacognition |
| title_fullStr | A comprehensive assessment of current methods for measuring metacognition |
| title_full_unstemmed | A comprehensive assessment of current methods for measuring metacognition |
| title_short | A comprehensive assessment of current methods for measuring metacognition |
| title_sort | comprehensive assessment of current methods for measuring metacognition |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-56117-0 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT dobromirrahnev acomprehensiveassessmentofcurrentmethodsformeasuringmetacognition AT dobromirrahnev comprehensiveassessmentofcurrentmethodsformeasuringmetacognition |