arbiter
JournalsAccount

Metacognition in Decision-Making Across Domains and Modalities: Evidence From Three Studies

Audrey Mazancieux et al.

Psychological Science2026https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976251415354article
AJG 4*ABDC A*
Weight
0.50

Abstract

Metacognition involves second-order judgments about first-order judgments. It remains unclear whether an individual's confidence in being correct is generated by the same system across tasks (domain generality) or whether it is computed independently in the context of each task (domain specificity). Previous studies have focused on correlations across several tasks, yet the evidence is mixed, and more complex models of domain generality were not taken into account. Analyzing data from 10 tasks collected across three studies in Denmark and Poland (N = 253-547 adult participants), we found a fixed pattern of cross-task correlations for both metacognitive bias and metacognitive efficiency. In accordance with previous studies, we found that hierarchical estimation of metacognitive efficiency led to higher correlations. We used confirmatory factor analyses to investigate the existence of general processes. We found evidence for a weak domain generality with a metacognitive module for perceptual tasks and another for cognitive tasks.

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976251415354

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{audrey2026,
  title        = {{Metacognition in Decision-Making Across Domains and Modalities: Evidence From Three Studies}},
  author       = {Audrey Mazancieux et al.},
  journal      = {Psychological Science},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976251415354},
}

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

Flag this paper

Metacognition in Decision-Making Across Domains and Modalities: Evidence From Three Studies

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.