Williams, David M., Bergström, Zara M, Grainger, Catherine (2016) Metacognitive monitoring and the hypercorrection effect in autism and the general population: Relation to autism(-like) traits and mindreading. Autism: International Journal of Research and Practice, in press, 22 (3). pp. 259-270. ISSN 1362-3613. E-ISSN 1461-7005. (doi:10.1177/1362361316680178) (KAR id:58824)
PDF
Author's Accepted Manuscript
Language: English |
|
Download this file (PDF/777kB) |
Preview |
Request a format suitable for use with assistive technology e.g. a screenreader | |
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362361316680178 |
Abstract
Among neurotypical adults, errors made with high confidence (i.e., errors a person strongly believed they would not make) are corrected more reliably than errors made with low confidence. This “hypercorrection effect” is thought to result from enhanced attention to information that reflects a “metacognitive mismatch” between one’s beliefs and reality. In Experiment 1, we employed a standard measure of this effect. Participants answered general knowledge questions and provided confidence judgements about how likely each answer was to be correct, after which feedback was given. Finally, participants were retested on all questions answered incorrectly during the initial phase. Mindreading ability and ASD-like traits were measured. We found that a representative sample of (n = 83) neurotypical participants made accurate confidence judgements (reflecting good metacognition) and showed the hypercorrection effect. Mindreading ability was associated with ASD-like traits and metacognition. However, the hypercorrection effect was non-significantly associated with mindreading or ASD-like traits. In Experiment 2, 11 children with ASD and 11 matched comparison participants completed the hypercorrection task. Although ASD children showed significantly diminished metacognitive ability, they showed an undiminished hypercorrection effect. The evidence in favour of an undiminished hypercorrection effect (null result) was moderate, according to Bayesian analysis (Bayes factor = 0.21).
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
DOI/Identification number: | 10.1177/1362361316680178 |
Subjects: | B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BF Psychology |
Divisions: | Divisions > Division of Human and Social Sciences > School of Psychology |
Funders: | Economic and Social Research Council (https://ror.org/03n0ht308) |
Depositing User: | David Williams |
Date Deposited: | 21 Nov 2016 13:26 UTC |
Last Modified: | 05 Nov 2024 10:50 UTC |
Resource URI: | https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/58824 (The current URI for this page, for reference purposes) |
- Link to SensusAccess
- Export to:
- RefWorks
- EPrints3 XML
- BibTeX
- CSV
- Depositors only (login required):