Metacognitive Modulation of Cognitive-Emotional Dynamics Under Social-Evaluative Stress: An Integrated Behavioural–EEG Study

Background/Objectives: Decision-making under socially evaluative stress engages a dynamic interplay between cognitive control, emotional appraisal, and motivational systems. Contemporary models of multi-level co-regulation posit that these systems operate in reciprocal modulation, redistributing processing resources to prioritise either rapid socio-emotional alignment or deliberate evaluation depending on situational demands. Methods: Adopting a neurofunctional approach, a novel dual-task protocol combining the MetaCognition–Stress Convergence Paradigm (MSCP) and the Social Stress Test Neuro-Evaluation (SST-NeuroEval), a simulated social–evaluative speech task calibrated across progressive emotional intensities, was implemented. Twenty professionals from an HR consultancy firm participated in the study, with concurrent recording of frontal-temporoparietal electroencephalography (EEG) and bespoke psychometric indices: the MetaStress-Insight Index and the TimeSense Scale. Results: Findings revealed that decision contexts with higher socio-emotional salience elicited faster, emotionally guided choices (mean RT difference emotional vs. cognitive: −220 ms, p = 0.026), accompanied by oscillatory signatures (frontal delta: F(1,19) = 13.30, p = 0.002; gamma: F(3,57) = 14.93, p ≤ 0.001) consistent with intensified socio-emotional integration and contextual reconstruction. Under evaluative stress, oscillatory activity shifted across phases, reflecting the transition from anticipatory regulation to reactive engagement, in line with models of phase-dependent stress adaptation. Across paradigms, convergences emerged between decision orientation, subjective stress, and oscillatory patterns, supporting the view that cognitive–emotional regulation operates as a coordinated, multi-level system. Conclusions: These results underscore the importance of integrating behavioural, experiential, and neural indices to characterise how individuals adaptively regulate decision-making under socially evaluative stress and highlight the potential of dual-paradigm designs for advancing theory and application in cognitive–affective neuroscience.