Metajudgment: Metatheories and Beliefs About Good Judgment Across Societies

We introduce the concept of "metajudgment" to provide a framework for understanding folk standards people use to navigate everyday decisions. Defined as a set of metatheories and beliefs about different types of judgment, metajudgment serves as the guiding principle behind the selection and application of reasoning strategies in various contexts. We review emerging studies on metajudgment to identify common dimensions, such as intuition versus deliberative reasoning and rationality versus reasonableness. These dimensions are examined across multiple societies. The reviewed findings illuminate an apparent paradox: Universal adaptive challenges produce largely consistent folk standards of judgment across cultures, whereas situational demands drive systematic within-person variability. Metajudgment offers a comprehensive framework for understanding diverse reasoning patterns in individual and cross-cultural contexts, calling for greater attention to the ecologically sensitive study of within-person judgmental variability.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Current Directions in Psychological Science
Published
2024-08-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214241262335
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.69

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Metajudgment: Metatheories and Beliefs About Good Judgment Across Societies

Igor Grossmann, Richard E. Eibach
2 citations
Current Directions in Psychological Science
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
0.69
article

Metajudgment: Metatheories and Beliefs About Good Judgment Across Societies

Igor Grossmann, Richard E. Eibach
article en
2 citations

Abstract

We introduce the concept of "metajudgment" to provide a framework for understanding folk standards people use to navigate everyday decisions. Defined as a set of metatheories and beliefs about different types of judgment, metajudgment serves as the guiding principle behind the selection and application of reasoning strategies in various contexts. We review emerging studies on metajudgment to identify common dimensions, such as intuition versus deliberative reasoning and rationality versus reasonableness. These dimensions are examined across multiple societies. The reviewed findings illuminate an apparent paradox: Universal adaptive challenges produce largely consistent folk standards of judgment across cultures, whereas situational demands drive systematic within-person variability. Metajudgment offers a comprehensive framework for understanding diverse reasoning patterns in individual and cross-cultural contexts, calling for greater attention to the ecologically sensitive study of within-person judgmental variability.

Current Directions in Psychological ScienceVol. 33(4)
University of Waterloo (CA)
John Templeton Foundation, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Openalex Percentile: Top 32%
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
0.69
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.