Arbuzova Polina, Peters Caroline, Röd Lukas, Koß Christina, Maurer Heiko, Maurer Lisa K, Müller Hermann, Verrel Julius, Filevich Elisa
Department of Psychology, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin.
Institute of Sport Science, Justus-Liebig Universität Giessen.
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2021 Nov;150(11):2208-2229. doi: 10.1037/xge0000892. Epub 2021 Apr 26.
We can make exquisitely precise movements without the apparent need for conscious monitoring. But can we monitor the low-level movement parameters when prompted? And what are the mechanisms that allow us to monitor our movements? To answer these questions, we designed a semivirtual ball throwing task. On each trial, participants first threw a virtual ball by moving their arm (with or without visual feedback, or replayed from a previous trial) and then made a two-alternative forced choice on the resulting ball trajectory. They then rated their confidence in their decision. We measured metacognitive efficiency using meta-d'/d' and compared it between different informational domains of the first-order task (motor, visuomotor or visual information alone), as well as between two different versions of the task based on different parameters of the movement: proximal (position of the arm) or distal (resulting trajectory of the ball thrown). We found that participants were able to monitor their performance based on distal motor information as well as when proximal information was available. Their metacognitive efficiency was also equally high in conditions with different sources of information available. The analysis of correlations across participants revealed an unexpected result: While metacognitive efficiency correlated between informational domains (which would indicate domain-generality of metacognition), it did not correlate across the different parameters of movement. We discuss possible sources of this discrepancy and argue that specific first-order task demands may play a crucial role in our metacognitive ability and should be considered when making inferences about domain-generality based on correlations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
我们能够做出极其精确的动作,而显然无需有意识的监控。但当受到提示时,我们能否监控低层次的运动参数呢?以及让我们能够监控自身动作的机制是什么呢?为了回答这些问题,我们设计了一项半虚拟投球任务。在每次试验中,参与者首先通过移动手臂(有或没有视觉反馈,或者从之前的试验中回放)来投掷一个虚拟球,然后对所产生的球的轨迹进行二选一的强制选择。接着,他们对自己的决定给出信心评级。我们使用元d'/d'来测量元认知效率,并在一阶任务的不同信息领域(仅运动、视觉运动或视觉信息)之间,以及基于不同运动参数的任务的两个不同版本(近端,即手臂的位置;或远端,即所投球的最终轨迹)之间进行比较。我们发现,参与者能够基于远端运动信息以及在有近端信息可用时监控自己的表现。在有不同信息来源的条件下,他们的元认知效率同样很高。对参与者之间相关性的分析揭示了一个意想不到的结果:虽然元认知效率在信息领域之间存在相关性(这表明元认知具有领域通用性),但在不同的运动参数之间却不存在相关性。我们讨论了这种差异可能的来源,并认为特定的一阶任务要求可能在我们的元认知能力中起着关键作用,并且在基于相关性推断领域通用性时应予以考虑。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c)2022美国心理学会,保留所有权利)