Original scientific paper

Metacognitive Judgments and Syllogistic Reasoning

Igor Bajšanski ; Department of Psychology, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences,University of Rijeka, Croatia
Maja Močibob ; Department of Psychology, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences,University of Rijeka, Croatia
Pavle Valerjev ; Department of Psychology, University of Zadar, Croatia

Abstract

In this study we examined the relationship between metacognitive judgments and accuracy in syllogistic reasoning. In three experiments, the participants made different types of metacognitive judgments: confidence judgments, judgments of performance and judgments of task difficulty. The confidence judgments were made (a) after producing a conclusion that logically followed from given premises (Experiment 1) and (b) after choosing the conclusion from a list of choices (Experiment 2), and judgments of performance were made (c) after a quick overview of a problem (Experiment 3). Judgments of difficulty were made before (Experiment 3) and after (Experiment 2) solving syllogistic problems. A total of 166 psychology students participated in the experiments. In all three experiments, participants were generally overconfident. The relative accuracy of judgments was generally low, with the exception of Experiment 1. The results do not indicate clearly that judgments made after solving tasks are more accurate than judgments made before solving them. The additional analysis by items showed positive correlations between different metacognitive judgments but lower correlations between judgments and reasoning accuracy, and negative correlations between metacognitive judgments and response times.

Keywords

metacognition; syllogistic reasoning; judgment accuracy

Hrčak ID:

120498

URI

https://hrcak.srce.hr/120498

Publication date:

30.4.2014.

Visits: 2.203 *