Does age affect metacognition? A cross-domain investigation using a hierarchical Bayesian framework

IF 2.8 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Cognition Pub Date : 2025-02-21 DOI:10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106089
Lucile Meunier-Duperray , Audrey Mazancieux , Céline Souchay , Stephen M. Fleming , Christine Bastin , Chris J.A. Moulin , Lucie Angel
{"title":"Does age affect metacognition? A cross-domain investigation using a hierarchical Bayesian framework","authors":"Lucile Meunier-Duperray ,&nbsp;Audrey Mazancieux ,&nbsp;Céline Souchay ,&nbsp;Stephen M. Fleming ,&nbsp;Christine Bastin ,&nbsp;Chris J.A. Moulin ,&nbsp;Lucie Angel","doi":"10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>According to previous research, the accuracy of metacognitive judgments in aging depends on the cognitive domain involved in the task, the experimental design, and the metacognitive index used. Older adults are frequently less accurate than younger adults in judging their episodic memory, while no difference is typically observed for semantic metamemory. In addition, age-related changes in metaperception appear to be highly task-dependent. Other metacognitive domains (such as metacognition of executive functioning) have been seldom explored. This study aimed to integrate methodological and theoretical advances in the study of metacognition to answer the question of whether metacognition is impaired in healthy aging. Data were collected in a large sample (<em>n</em> = 443) of participants aged 18 to 79. Participants provided retrospective confidence judgments in four domains: episodic memory, semantic memory, executive functioning, and visual perception. Our measure of accuracy, metacognitive efficiency, was estimated using a hierarchical Bayesian implementation of the meta-<em>d’</em> model. Results showed that metacognitive efficiency decreased with age in the episodic task and increased with age in the semantic task. There was no effect of age on metacognitive efficiency in the executive and perception tasks. Moreover, metacognitive efficiency appeared to rely on a domain-general process in older adults. Explaining the episodic metamemory deficit in aging could help understand the difficulties of older adults to use inferential processes for memory search and retrieval as well as their difficulties to implement memory strategies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48455,"journal":{"name":"Cognition","volume":"258 ","pages":"Article 106089"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010027725000290","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

According to previous research, the accuracy of metacognitive judgments in aging depends on the cognitive domain involved in the task, the experimental design, and the metacognitive index used. Older adults are frequently less accurate than younger adults in judging their episodic memory, while no difference is typically observed for semantic metamemory. In addition, age-related changes in metaperception appear to be highly task-dependent. Other metacognitive domains (such as metacognition of executive functioning) have been seldom explored. This study aimed to integrate methodological and theoretical advances in the study of metacognition to answer the question of whether metacognition is impaired in healthy aging. Data were collected in a large sample (n = 443) of participants aged 18 to 79. Participants provided retrospective confidence judgments in four domains: episodic memory, semantic memory, executive functioning, and visual perception. Our measure of accuracy, metacognitive efficiency, was estimated using a hierarchical Bayesian implementation of the meta-d’ model. Results showed that metacognitive efficiency decreased with age in the episodic task and increased with age in the semantic task. There was no effect of age on metacognitive efficiency in the executive and perception tasks. Moreover, metacognitive efficiency appeared to rely on a domain-general process in older adults. Explaining the episodic metamemory deficit in aging could help understand the difficulties of older adults to use inferential processes for memory search and retrieval as well as their difficulties to implement memory strategies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cognition
Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
283
期刊介绍: Cognition is an international journal that publishes theoretical and experimental papers on the study of the mind. It covers a wide variety of subjects concerning all the different aspects of cognition, ranging from biological and experimental studies to formal analysis. Contributions from the fields of psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, computer science, mathematics, ethology and philosophy are welcome in this journal provided that they have some bearing on the functioning of the mind. In addition, the journal serves as a forum for discussion of social and political aspects of cognitive science.
期刊最新文献
Does age affect metacognition? A cross-domain investigation using a hierarchical Bayesian framework Implicit prediction as a consequence of statistical learning Belief updating in the face of misinformation: The role of source reliability People accurately predict the shape but not the parameters of skill learning curves Involvement of episodic memory in language comprehension: Naturalistic comprehension pushes unrelated words closer in semantic space for at least 12 h
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1