lecture 9: reasoning - metacognition

metacognition

-something which refers to or reflects on the original concept

-thinking about thinking

-when you reflect on the contents of your mind

metacognitive judgements

-perceptions of your own mental state, including:

• confidence

• awareness

Fuocco, 1996 - example of metacognitive failure

-McArthur Wheeler robbed two banks with no visible attempt at disguise

-arrested and when questioned said he “wore the juice” → he thought that rubbing his face with lemon juice rendered it invisible to videotape cameras

confirmation bias

-a preference for seeking information that can only confirm your existing beliefs, rather than contradict it

-about active search for information, not just whether you believe information when you encounter it

Wason’s selection task

-four cards that all have:

• a letter on one side

• a number on the other side

four cards are: E, X, 1, 6

-rule is that all cards with a vowel on one side have an even number on the other side

-which card would you turn over to determine if the statement is true?

-confirmation bias is that most people turn over E and 6, when E and 1 test the rule

Wason task - controls

-things that don’t help:

• motivation/reward

• changing the wording

• university education

-something that does help is making the task less abstract

Wason’s selection task - social rule version

-four people in a pub, each has a drink:

• have the age on one side

• other side has the drink

rule is that all people with an alcoholic drink must be older than 18

-which people do you need to inspect to decide if the rule is being broken?

most errors are two errors

1. making the wrong choice

2. thinking you’ve made the right choice

→ error + metacognitive error

choosing affected by misattribution

-The Mere Exposure Effect

-Mental contamination

-misattribution is making errors in identifying the cause of something

The Mere Exposure Effect (MEE)

-the idea that having already encountered something encourages future preference

-typically found after brief, repeated exposures with low levels of attention and involvement

-often used in advertising

Stafford & Grimes (2012) - recognition memory and MME

-recognition memory may support MME

-230 students exposed to 10 novel brand logos

-10 logos were paired with 10 unseen novel logo

-10 pairs of logos, one target and one distractor in the test phase

-found that recognition, whether correct or mistaken will enhance (rather than inhibit) the likelihood of preference

explanation of recognition and MME

-fluency

-exposure means that stimuli is processed with ease (fluency) and this ease can be interpreted as being pleasing

misattribution based on fluency

-preference judgements are quick heuristic process with a systematic bias in preferring things that are easily processed → don’t have access to full memory and so can’t remember everything

-recognition and preference are based on fluency → memory judgements correlate with preference judgements

misattribution

-participants say they recognise something when it is novel (meta memory error)

-thinking that you have seen something before when you haven’t is a metacognitive process and misattribution is a metacognitive error

mental contamination

-Wilson & Brekke (1994)

-the process whereby a person has an unwanted response because of mental processing that is unconscious or uncontrollable

Dutton & Aron 1974 (mental contamination)

-450ft Capilano Suspension Bridge

-has many arousal-inducing features:

• tendency to tilt, sway and wobble

• very low handrails of wire cable

• creates the impression that one is about to fall off

-evidence for heightened sexual attraction under conditions of high anxiety

Dutton & Aron 1974 - results (mental contamination)

-male participants approached by female researcher on Capilano Suspension Bridge or non-fear arousing bridge

-greater tendency for those on the fear arousing bridge to contact the female researcher afterwards than those on the non-fear arousing bridge

-misattribution and source confusion of fear arousal to sexual arousal/attraction

misattribution summary

-don’t have access to all causes of thoughts and feelings

-use metacognitive processes of asking ourselves:

• is that memory reliable?

• where did that feeling come from?

-attribution is a continuous metacognitive process → but can have metacognitive errors

illusion of explanatory depth (IoED)

-Rozenblit & Keil (2002)

-most people feel they understand the world with far greater detail, coherence and depth than they really do

-thinking you understand something more than you do is a metacognitive error

stages of Rozenblit & Keil (2002)

-instructions and training

-first rating of belief of understanding the concept

-generate explanation

-second rating of belief of understanding the concept

-answer diagnostic question

-third rating of belief of understanding the concept

-read expert explanation

-fourth rating of belief of understanding the concept (initial knowledge relative to expert explanation)

-fifth rating of belief of understanding the concept (current knowledge after reading expert explanation)

Rozenblit & Keil (2002) - results

-second, third and fourth ratings after being asked to calibrate their understanding and self rating goes down

-realise they do not understand as well as they originally believed they did (first rating)

-fifth rating higher than before as they sense they understand after going through the different processes

reason of IoED

-rate our level of understanding higher than we have

-because we misattribute expertise based on familiarity

Ferncach et al (2013) - using IoED to change minds

-people often hold extreme political views, yet may know less about complex policies than they think

-asked participants to rate 6 political policies

-asked to explain how the policy would work and its effect

-having to explain policies moderated attitudes towards the policy

• explanation undermines the illusion of understanding

• can adjust our thinking to correct errors

Dunning-Kruger effect

-not always aware of errors in judgement

-high confidence in belief is metacognition

-so high confidence in a false belief is a metacognitive error

domains tested (Dunning-Kruger effect)

1. self rated belief in ability compared to others

2. tested the ability using an objective measure

-found that those in the lowest quartile perceived themselves as being more skilled than they actually were

-whereas the most skilled underestimated their skill

the dual burden theory (mechanism of Dunning-Kruger effect)

-performance and metacognition of the performance (ability to judge how good you are) are both based on the skill

-high skill = perform well and understand the skill so can judge your ability

-low skill = low performance but lack knowledge to make accurate metacognitive judgements

-incompetent individuals lack the metacognitive skills necessary for accurate self-assessment

criticism of Dunning-Kruger effect

-McIntosh and Della Sala questioned the validity and reliability of findings to support the effect

-referred to regression to the mean as accounting for the findings

-suggest that information against the effect is often ignored in favour of the causal idea rather than accept a statistical explanation for the pattern → a cognitive bias

-Dunning-Kruger effect has been weaponsied as a way to dismiss others’ views

metacognition and heuristics

-metacognitive errors can result from basing judgement on wrong information

-metacognition employs heuristics due to lack of information

-use heuristics to understand ourselves and the world

-metacognitive errors can result from heuristics