Adaptive regulation of confidence following metacognitive conflict: Evidence from behavior and computational modeling.

{"It":[0],"is":[1,7,48],"well":[2],"established":[3],"that":[4,104,114,186],"external":[5,22,55,101],"feedback":[6,23,33,56,102],"effective":[8],"not":[9],"only":[10],"for":[11,17],"enhancing":[12],"cognitive":[13,60],"performance":[14,87],"but":[15,100],"also":[16],"regulating":[18],"metacognitive":[19,62,115,127,144,159,196,213,216],"monitoring.":[20],"However,":[21],"could":[24],"be":[25],"detrimental":[26],"when":[27],"it":[28,47],"conflicts":[29],"with":[30,137,154,176],"one's":[31],"internal":[32,53],"signal":[34],"(i.e.,":[35],"the":[36,105,164,212],"level":[37,82],"of":[38,72,83,143,158,215],"confidence":[39,84,96,125,148,193],"we":[40,65,170],"have":[41,94],"in":[42,69,76,97,135,152,191],"our":[43,206],"decisions).":[44],"Currently,":[45],"however,":[46],"unknown":[49],"how":[50],"discrepancies":[51],"between":[52],"and":[54,61,85,147],"(\\"metacognitive":[57],"conflict\\")":[58],"influence":[59],"performance.":[63],"Here,":[64],"examined":[66],"this":[67,130,168],"question":[68],"a":[70,138,155],"series":[71],"perceptual":[73],"decision-making":[74],"experiments":[75],"which":[77],"participants":[78,93,187],"reported":[79],"both":[80],"their":[81,98],"received":[86],"feedback.":[88],"Metacognitive":[89],"conflict":[90,116,145],"occurs":[91],"if":[92],"high":[95,139,156],"decision,":[99],"indicates":[103],"decision":[106],"was":[107,133,149],"erroneous,":[108],"or":[109],"vice":[110],"versa.":[111],"Results":[112],"revealed":[113,185],"triggers":[117],"next-trial":[118],"behavioral":[119,131],"adjustments:":[120],"Participants":[121],"exhibit":[122],"significantly":[123],"lower":[124],"following":[126],"conflict.":[128,160,217],"Furthermore,":[129],"adjustment":[132],"smaller":[134],"blocks":[136,153],"versus":[140],"low":[141],"proportion":[142,157],"trials,":[146],"generally":[150],"reduced":[151],"To":[161],"better":[162],"characterize":[163],"computational":[165],"mechanisms":[166],"underlying":[167],"effect,":[169],"deployed":[171],"an":[172],"evidence":[173],"accumulation":[174,179],"model":[175],"additional":[177],"postdecision":[178,202],"to":[180],"quantify":[181],"confidence.":[182],"Model":[183],"fits":[184],"become":[188],"more":[189],"conservative":[190],"reporting":[192],"after":[194],"experiencing":[195],"conflict,":[197],"as":[198],"evidenced":[199],"by":[200],"biased":[201],"starting":[203],"points.":[204],"Jointly,":[205],"findings":[207],"provide":[208],"much-needed":[209],"insight":[210],"into":[211],"consequences":[214],"(PsycInfo":[218],"Database":[219],"Record":[220],"(c)":[221],"2026":[222],"APA,":[223],"all":[224],"rights":[225],"reserved).":[226]}

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Experimental Psychology General
Published
2026-09-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001997
Primary Topic
Memory Processes and Influences
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

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

Adaptive regulation of confidence following metacognitive conflict: Evidence from behavior and computational modeling.

Kobe Desender, Luc Vermeylen, Stef Herregods, Jintao Xing
Journal of Experimental Psychology General
Memory Processes and Influences
article

Adaptive regulation of confidence following metacognitive conflict: Evidence from behavior and computational modeling.

Kobe Desender, Luc Vermeylen, Stef Herregods, Jintao Xing
article en

Abstract

It is well established that external feedback is effective not only for enhancing cognitive performance but also for regulating metacognitive monitoring. However, external feedback could be detrimental when it conflicts with one's internal feedback signal (i.e., the level of confidence we have in our decisions). Currently, however, it is unknown how discrepancies between internal and external feedback ("metacognitive conflict") influence cognitive and metacognitive performance. Here, we examined this question in a series of perceptual decision-making experiments in which participants reported both their level of confidence and received performance feedback. Metacognitive conflict occurs if participants have high confidence in their decision, but external feedback indicates that the decision was erroneous, or vice versa. Results revealed that metacognitive conflict triggers next-trial behavioral adjustments: Participants exhibit significantly lower confidence following metacognitive conflict. Furthermore, this behavioral adjustment was smaller in blocks with a high versus low proportion of metacognitive conflict trials, and confidence was generally reduced in blocks with a high proportion of metacognitive conflict. To better characterize the computational mechanisms underlying this effect, we deployed an evidence accumulation model with additional postdecision accumulation to quantify confidence. Model fits revealed that participants become more conservative in reporting confidence after experiencing metacognitive conflict, as evidenced by biased postdecision starting points. Jointly, our findings provide much-needed insight into the metacognitive consequences of metacognitive conflict. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

Journal of Experimental Psychology General
KU Leuven (BE)
Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek, China Scholarship Council
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Memory Processes and Influences
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.