Overconfidence in the Cognitive Reflection Test: Comparing Confidence Resolution for Reasoning vs. General Knowledge.

André Mata
Author Information
  1. André Mata: CICPSI, Faculdade de Psicologia, Universidade de Lisboa, 1649-013 Lisboa, Portugal.

Abstract

This research examines the metacognitive awareness that people have about their reasoning performance in the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT). The first two studies compare confidence judgments about the CRT vs. general knowledge (GK) questions. Results show that (1) people are generally able to discriminate between correct and incorrect answers, but this ability is far from perfect, and it is greater for GK questions than for CRT problems. Indeed, and strikingly, (2) incorrect responses to CRT problems are produced with approximately the same level of confidence as responses to GK questions. However, (3) even though confidence is high for incorrect responses to CRT problems, it is even higher for correct responses. The results of two additional studies show that these differences in confidence are ultimately related to the conflict that CRT problems pose between intuition and deliberation. These findings have implications for the possibility of implicit error monitoring and dual-process models of overconfidence.

Keywords

References

  1. J Intell. 2022 Nov 17;10(4): [PMID: 36412789]
  2. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2013 Jul;39(4):1265-73 [PMID: 23088550]
  3. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2012 Jan;7(1):28-38 [PMID: 26168420]
  4. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2018 May;71(5):1188-1208 [PMID: 28376653]
  5. Psychol Sci. 2015 Aug;26(8):1295-303 [PMID: 26174782]
  6. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2022 Sep;151(9):2009-2028 [PMID: 35130014]
  7. Mem Cognit. 2010 Mar;38(2):186-96 [PMID: 20173191]
  8. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2014 Jun;143(3):1349-68 [PMID: 24364687]
  9. Psychol Rev. 2008 Apr;115(2):502-17 [PMID: 18426301]
  10. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1999 Dec;77(6):1121-34 [PMID: 10626367]
  11. PLoS One. 2011 Jan 25;6(1):e15954 [PMID: 21283574]
  12. Cognition. 2017 Jan;158:90-109 [PMID: 27816844]
  13. Psychol Rev. 2000 Apr;107(2):384-96 [PMID: 10789203]
  14. PLoS One. 2017 Nov 3;12(11):e0186404 [PMID: 29099840]
  15. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2019 Dec;117(6):1061-1082 [PMID: 31219289]
  16. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2004 May;30(3):729-32 [PMID: 15099140]
  17. Cognition. 2014 Nov;133(2):457-63 [PMID: 25156628]
  18. Cognition. 2023 Jun;235:105417 [PMID: 36870202]
  19. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2022 Aug 25;: [PMID: 36006720]
  20. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2013 Oct;144(2):433-43 [PMID: 24036202]
  21. Behav Res Methods. 2018 Oct;50(5):1953-1959 [PMID: 28849403]
  22. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2008 Jul;34(4):945-59 [PMID: 18605880]
  23. Mem Cognit. 1994 Jan;22(1):63-9 [PMID: 8035686]
  24. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1999 Aug;77(2):221-32 [PMID: 10474208]
  25. Psychon Bull Rev. 2013 Apr;20(2):269-73 [PMID: 23417270]
  26. Psychon Bull Rev. 2017 Dec;24(6):1774-1784 [PMID: 28224482]
  27. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2013 Sep;105(3):353-73 [PMID: 23895268]
  28. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2016 Feb;164:56-64 [PMID: 26722837]
  29. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2006 Nov;91(5):797-813 [PMID: 17059302]
  30. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2014 Oct;143(5):1958-71 [PMID: 24911004]
  31. Mem Cognit. 2016 Oct;44(7):1050-63 [PMID: 27115609]
  32. Neuropsychologia. 2016 Oct;91:499-508 [PMID: 27647553]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0CRTconfidenceproblemsresponsesGKquestionsincorrectpeopleCognitiveReflectiontwostudiesvsshowcorrectevenconflicterrormonitoringoverconfidenceresearchexaminesmetacognitiveawarenessreasoningperformanceTestfirstcomparejudgmentsgeneralknowledgeResults1generallyablediscriminateanswersabilityfarperfectgreaterIndeedstrikingly2producedapproximatelylevelHowever3thoughhighhigherresultsadditionaldifferencesultimatelyrelatedposeintuitiondeliberationfindingsimplicationspossibilityimplicitdual-processmodelsOverconfidenceTest:ComparingConfidenceResolutionReasoningGeneralKnowledgecognitivereflectiondetection

Similar Articles

Cited By