arbiter
JournalsAccount

Correction to "Metacognitive monitoring of political facts: Effects of political knowledge, political orientation, and cognitive style" by Fulton et al. (2025).

Unknown author

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied2026https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000563article
AJG 4ABDC A
Weight
0.50

Abstract

Reports an error in "Metacognitive monitoring of political facts: Effects of political, orientation and knowledge and cognitive style" by Erika K. Fulton, Alicyn E. Ager, Erin Madison and Jeremy Russell (Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, Advanced Online Publication, Oct 30, 2025, np; see record 2026-82121-001). The title was incorrectly published as "Metacognitive Monitoring of Political Facts: Effects of Political, Orientation and Knowledge and Cognitive Style." The byline appears as "Metacognitive Monitoring of Political Facts: Effects On" and has been corrected to "Metacognitive Monitoring of Political Facts." The online version of this article has been corrected. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2026-82121-001.) Accurate metacognition is essential to informed political decisions and preventing the spread of misinformation, but research on metacognitive monitoring of political facts, outside of misinformation studies, has not met metacognitive research measurement standards. We addressed this limitation and assessed potential factors (political knowledge, political orientation, and cognitive style) related to this type of metacognitive monitoring accuracy. A sample of 216 Amazon Mechanical Turk participants completed measures of political orientation, political knowledge, and cognitive style, along with a test of political metacognitive monitoring accuracy, between February 2021 and March 2022. Participants were generally overconfident in their political knowledge, especially those with less political knowledge and who were more conservative, with conservatives also showing worse relative metacognitive accuracy. Cognitive style partially explained differences due to political orientation. Our participants were U.S. residents and disproportionately White, male, and lower-to-middle income, so studies of other samples and political contexts are needed for generalizability. Results also build on cue theory, showing that political knowledge and political orientation can act as metacognitive judgment cues. The study highlights the need to improve political metacognitive monitoring accuracy and reveals three targets for intervention: political knowledge, political orientation, and cognitive style. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000563

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{unknown2026,
  title        = {{Correction to "Metacognitive monitoring of political facts: Effects of political knowledge, political orientation, and cognitive style" by Fulton et al. (2025).}},
  author       = {Unknown author},
  journal      = {Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000563},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Correction to "Metacognitive monitoring of political facts: Effects of political knowledge, political orientation, and cognitive style" by Fulton et al. (2025).

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.