Search

Self-monitoring is a metacognitive activity that individuals control and alter their behavior based on the assessments of their own cognitive status, which involves both explicit and implicit dimensions. Confidence rating task is mostly used to measure explicit monitoring. Recently post-decision wagering (PDW) task has been developed to quantify implicit monitoring ability. Specifically, temporal wagering task estimates the decision confidence by measuring the waiting time subjects are willing to spend in waiting delayed reward, which is called wagering time (WT). The index has only been applied in animals experiment so far, but it values in deeply exploring the underlying mechanism of metacognitive monitoring. Thus in this experiment, WT is tested whether it fits on measuring human’s implicit monitoring ability. Results show that there are significantly positive correlation between WT and confidence. Moreover, there are several consistent effects showing metacognitive features in both WT and confidence—being able to measure metacognitive sensitivity and metacognitive efficiency; predicting the decision accuracy as well as serial dependence effect. All results have illustrated that WT indeed can be a good proxy of confidence and therefore provide an effective measure to study metacognitive monitoring on human. It can also help instruct the clinical treatments of psychiatric patients with deficits in self-monitoring.We apply a within-subject design in which both temporal wagering task and confidence rating task are used. 3600 trials were colleccted from 30 subjects (average age = 22.1, sd = 0.84). Half of the trials are temporal wagering data.

The field of primate cognition studies how primates, including humans, perceive, process, store, retrieve, and use information to guide decision making and other behavior. Much of this research is motivated by a desire to understand how these abilities evolved. Large and diverse samples from a wide range of species are vital to achieving this goal. In reality, however, primate cognition research suffers from small sample sizes and is often limited to a handful of species, which constrains the evolutionary inferences we can draw. We conducted a systematic review of primate cognition research published between 2014 and 2019 to quantify the extent of this problem. Across 574 studies, the median sample size was 7 individuals. Less than 15% of primate species were studied at all, and only 19% of studies included more than one species. Further, the species that were studied varied widely in how much research attention they received, partly because a small number of test sites contributed most of the studies. These results suggest that the generalizability of primate cognition studies may be severely limited. Publication bias, questionable research practices, and a lack of replication attempts may exacerbate these problems. We describe the ManyPrimates project as one approach to overcoming some of these issues by establishing an infrastructure for large-scale collaboration in primate cognition research. Building on similar initiatives in other areas of psychology, this approach has already yielded one of the largest and most diverse primate samples to date and enables us to ask many research questions that can only be addressed through collaboration