Measuring metacognition of direct and indirect parameters of voluntary movement.

Published on Apr 26, 2021in Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
· DOI :10.1037/XGE0000892
Polina Arbuzova2
Estimated H-index: 2
(Humboldt University of Berlin),
Caroline Peters2
Estimated H-index: 2
(Humboldt University of Berlin)
+ 6 AuthorsElisa Filevich11
Estimated H-index: 11
(Humboldt University of Berlin)
Source
Abstract
We can make exquisitely precise movements without the apparent need for conscious monitoring. But can we monitor the low-level movement parameters when prompted? And what are the mechanisms that allow us to monitor our movements? To answer these questions, we designed a semivirtual ball throwing task. On each trial, participants first threw a virtual ball by moving their arm (with or without visual feedback, or replayed from a previous trial) and then made a two-alternative forced choice on the resulting ball trajectory. They then rated their confidence in their decision. We measured metacognitive efficiency using meta-d'/d' and compared it between different informational domains of the first-order task (motor, visuomotor or visual information alone), as well as between two different versions of the task based on different parameters of the movement: proximal (position of the arm) or distal (resulting trajectory of the ball thrown). We found that participants were able to monitor their performance based on distal motor information as well as when proximal information was available. Their metacognitive efficiency was also equally high in conditions with different sources of information available. The analysis of correlations across participants revealed an unexpected result: While metacognitive efficiency correlated between informational domains (which would indicate domain-generality of metacognition), it did not correlate across the different parameters of movement. We discuss possible sources of this discrepancy and argue that specific first-order task demands may play a crucial role in our metacognitive ability and should be considered when making inferences about domain-generality based on correlations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
📖 Papers frequently viewed together
4 Citations
3 Citations
12 Citations
References0
Newest
Cited By1
Newest
#1Marika Constanta (Humboldt University of Berlin)
#2Roy Salomon (BIU: Bar-Ilan University)H-Index: 21
Last. Elisa Filevich (MPG: Max Planck Society)H-Index: 11
view all 3 authors...
Judgments of agency, our sense of control over our actions and the environment, are often assumed to be metacognitive. We examined this assumption at the computational level by comparing the effects of sensory noise on agency judgments to those on confidence judgements, which are widely accepted to be metacognitive in nature. In two tasks, participants rated agency, or confidence in a decision about their agency, over a virtual hand that tracked their movements, either synchronously or with a de...
Source