Does age affect metacognition? A cross-domain investigation using a hierarchical Bayesian framework

According to previous research, the accuracy of metacognitive judgments in aging depends on the cognitive domain involved in the task, the experimental design, and the metacognitive index used. Older adults are frequently less accurate than younger adults in judging their episodic memory, while no difference is typically observed for semantic metamemory. In addition, age-related changes in metaperception appear to be highly task-dependent. Other metacognitive domains (such as metacognition of executive functioning) have been seldom explored. This study aimed to integrate methodological and theoretical advances in the study of metacognition to answer the question of whether metacognition is impaired in healthy aging. Data were collected in a large sample (n = 443) of participants aged 18 to 79. Participants provided retrospective confidence judgments in four domains: episodic memory, semantic memory, executive functioning, and visual perception. Our measure of accuracy, metacognitive efficiency, was estimated using a hierarchical Bayesian implementation of the meta-d' model. Results showed that metacognitive efficiency decreased with age in the episodic task and increased with age in the semantic task. There was no effect of age on metacognitive efficiency in the executive and perception tasks. Moreover, metacognitive efficiency appeared to rely on a domain-general process in older adults. Explaining the episodic metamemory deficit in aging could help understand the difficulties of older adults to use inferential processes for memory search and retrieval as well as their difficulties to implement memory strategies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cognition
Published
2025-02-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106089
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Memory Processes and Influences
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.72

Funders

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

Does age affect metacognition? A cross-domain investigation using a hierarchical Bayesian framework

Christine Bastin, Stephen J. Fleming, Audrey Mazancieux, Céline Souchay et al.
4 citations
Cognition
Memory Processes and Influences
5.72
article

Does age affect metacognition? A cross-domain investigation using a hierarchical Bayesian framework

Christine Bastin, Stephen J. Fleming, Audrey Mazancieux, Céline Souchay, Chris J. A. Moulin, Lucile Meunier-Duperray, Lucie Angel
article en
4 citations

Abstract

According to previous research, the accuracy of metacognitive judgments in aging depends on the cognitive domain involved in the task, the experimental design, and the metacognitive index used. Older adults are frequently less accurate than younger adults in judging their episodic memory, while no difference is typically observed for semantic metamemory. In addition, age-related changes in metaperception appear to be highly task-dependent. Other metacognitive domains (such as metacognition of executive functioning) have been seldom explored. This study aimed to integrate methodological and theoretical advances in the study of metacognition to answer the question of whether metacognition is impaired in healthy aging. Data were collected in a large sample (n = 443) of participants aged 18 to 79. Participants provided retrospective confidence judgments in four domains: episodic memory, semantic memory, executive functioning, and visual perception. Our measure of accuracy, metacognitive efficiency, was estimated using a hierarchical Bayesian implementation of the meta-d' model. Results showed that metacognitive efficiency decreased with age in the episodic task and increased with age in the semantic task. There was no effect of age on metacognitive efficiency in the executive and perception tasks. Moreover, metacognitive efficiency appeared to rely on a domain-general process in older adults. Explaining the episodic metamemory deficit in aging could help understand the difficulties of older adults to use inferential processes for memory search and retrieval as well as their difficulties to implement memory strategies.

CognitionVol. 258
Université de Tours (FR), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR), University of Liège (BE), Université de Poitiers (FR), Centre de Recherches sur la Cognition et l'Apprentissage (FR), Université Savoie Mont Blanc (FR), Université Grenoble Alpes (FR)
Experimental Psychology Society, Agence Nationale de la Recherche
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Memory Processes and Influences
5.72
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.