Meta-Reasoning Judgments in Non-Verbal Problems
The typical tasks that have been used so far in metacognitive judgments research involve verbal stimuli. The central question that is addressed in the present research is: How do people monitor their chance for success when confronting with non-verbal problems? The present research examined potential cues underlying initial Judgment of Solvability (iJOS), final JOS (fJOS) and confidence. Specifically, I focused on the perception of the visual elements of the problem, and examined whether global (vs. local) perception provides cues in the same manner across these three judgments. These cues are unique to non-verbal problems and represent a novel type of heuristic cues to the metacognitive research realm. In Experiment 1 participants faced solvable Ravens Matrices mixed with unsolvable matrices. First, they were instructed to provide iJOS without trying to solve the problem. After trying to solve the problem, they provided fJOS if could not solve the problem, or confidence regarding an answer they provided. Experiment 2 focused on another cue, familiarity, that was measured in two ways – typicality and ease of nameability. In this experiment, participants were asked to provide nameability and typicality judgments to the same problems as in experiment 1. I examined whether judgments are predictive of judgments provided in Experiment 1. Interestingly, global perception cue, manipulated in both experiments, affected fJOS and confidence judgments, while familiarity cue, collected in Experiment 2, was associated only with iJOS. Moreover, these heuristic cues, both global perception and familiarity, were more misleading when confronting unsolvable problems. These findings contribute to the theoretical framework of the effect of heuristic cues on metacognitive judgments in a new realm. Specifically, they shed lights on the way people monitor their information processing when confronting non-verbal problems.