Evidence of a metacognitive illusion in judgments about the effects of music on cognitive performance

Two experiments served to examine how people arrive at stimulus-specific prospective judgments about the distracting effects of speech on cognitive performance. The direct-access account implies that people have direct metacognitive access to the cognitive effects of sounds that determine distraction. The processing-fluency account implies that people rely on the processing-fluency heuristic to predict the distracting effects of sounds on cognitive performance. To test these accounts against each other, we manipulated the processing fluency of speech by playing speech forward or backward and by playing speech in the participants’ native or a foreign language. Forward speech and native speech disrupted serial recall to the same degree as backward speech and foreign speech, respectively. However, the more fluently experienced forward speech and native speech were incorrectly predicted to be less distracting than backward speech and foreign speech. This provides evidence of a metacognitive illusion in stimulus-specific prospective judgments of distraction by speech, supporting the processing-fluency account over the direct-access account. The difference between more and less fluently experienced speech was largely absent in the participants’ global retrospective judgments of distraction, suggesting that people gain access to comparatively valid cues when experiencing the distracting effects of speech on their serial-recall performance firsthand.

The duplex-mechanism account of auditory distraction has been extended to predict that people should have metacognitive awareness of the disruptive effect of auditory deviants on cognitive performance but little to no such awareness of the disruptive effect of changing-state relative to steady-state auditory distractors. To test this prediction, we assessed different types of metacognitive judgments about the disruptive effects of auditory-deviant, changing-state, and steady-state distractor sequences on serial recall. In a questionnaire, participants read about an irrelevant-speech experiment and were asked to provide metacognitive beliefs about how serial-recall performance would be affected by the different types of distractors. Another sample of participants heard the auditory distractors before predicting how their own serial-recall performance would suffer or benefit from the distractors. After participants had experienced the disruptive effects of the distractor sequences first hand, they were asked to make episodic retrospective judgments about how they thought the distractor sequences had affected their performance. The results consistently show that people are, on average, well aware of the greater disruptive effect of deviant and changing-state relative to steady-state distractors. Irrespective of condition, prospective and retrospective judgments of distraction were poor predictors of the individual susceptibility to distraction. These findings suggest that phenomena of auditory distraction cannot be categorized in two separate classes based on metacognitive awareness.

Extensive research has been conducted to understand how accurately students monitor their studying and performance via metacognitive judgments. Moreover, the bases of students’ metacognitive judgments are of interest. While previous results are quite consistent regarding the importance of performance for the accuracy of metacognitive judgments, results regarding motivational and personality variables are rather heterogeneous. This paper reports on two studies that simultaneously examined the predictive power of several performance, motivational, and personality variables on metacognitive judgments. The studies investigated a set of judgments (local and global postdictions in Study 1 and global pre- and postdictions in Study 2) and accuracy scores (bias, sensitivity, and specificity) in two different settings. Individual differences in judgments and judgment accuracy were studied via hierarchical regression analyses. Study 1 with N = 245 undergraduate students identified performance and domain-specific self-concept as relevant predictors for judgments after test taking. This was consistently found for local and global judgments. Study 2 with N = 138 undergraduate students hence focused on domain-specific self-concept and extended results to predictions. Study 2 replicated results for global postdictions but not predictions. Specifically, before task processing, students’ judgments relied mostly on domain-specific self-concept but not on test performance itself. The studies indicate that different judgments and measures of judgment accuracy are needed to obtain comprehensive insights into individual differences in metacognitive monitoring.

The effects of auditory distraction in memory tasks have, to date, been examined with procedures that minimize participants’ control over their own memory processes. Surprisingly little attention has been paid to metacognitive control factors which might affect memory performance. In this study, we investigate the effects of auditory distraction on metacognitive control of memory, examining the effects of auditory distraction in recognition tasks utilizing the metacognitive framework of Koriat and Goldsmith (1996), to determine whether strategic regulation of memory accuracy is impacted by auditory distraction. Results replicated previous findings in showing that auditory distraction impairs memory performance in tasks minimizing participants’ metacognitive control (forced-report test). However, the results revealed also that when metacognitive control is allowed (free-report tests), auditory distraction impacts upon a range of metacognitive indices. In the present study, auditory distraction undermined accuracy of metacognitive monitoring (resolution), reduced confidence in responses provided and, correspondingly, increased participants’ propensity to withhold responses in free-report recognition. Crucially, changes in metacognitive processes were related to impairment in free-report recognition performance, as the use of the “don’t know” option under distraction led to a reduction in the number of correct responses volunteered in free-report tests. Overall, the present results show how auditory distraction exerts its influence on memory performance via both memory and metamemory processes.

Experience-based cues, such as perceptual fluency, have long been thought to influence metacognitive judgments (Kelley & Jacoby, 1996; Koriat, 1997). Studies found that manipulations of perceptual fluency via changes in font and volume alter Judgments of Learning (JOLs) without influencing memory performance (Rhodes & Castel, 2008, 2009). Nonetheless, recent research (Mueller, Tauber, & Dunlosky, 2013; Mueller, Dunlosky, Tauber, & Rhodes, 2014, 2016) has challenged the notion that experience-based cues such as fluency are the primary basis for item-level JOLs, arguing instead that preexisting beliefs about these manipulations are responsible for these effects. For the first time, we compared global metacognitive judgments to item-level JOLs made during study to independently assess the contribution of beliefs and experience to volume-effects on JOLs. In 3 experiments, we found evidence for strong beliefs about volume-effects on memory, both before and after a study-test phase. However, these beliefs either did not account for the volume effect on JOLs (Experiment 3) or only partially accounted for the volume effect on JOLs (Experiments 1 and 2). Further, in Experiments 2 and 3 global performance estimates (before and after study) did not differ with respect to the volume dose whereas item-level JOLs generally varied with dose strength. Taken together, our findings suggest that both beliefs and experience-based cues contribute independently to the effects of volume on item-level JOLs, but that beliefs alone cannot fully account for the effects of volume on item-level JOLs. (PsycINFO Database Record

It is unclear whether metacognitive judgments are made on the basis of domain-generality or domain-specificity. In the current study, we compared both behavioral and event-related potential (ERP) correlates of retrospective (retrospective confidence judgments: RCJs), and prospective (feeling of knowing: FOK) metacognitive judgments during episodic and semantic memory tasks in 82 participants. Behavioral results indicated that FOK judgments reflect a domain-specific process, while RCJ reflect a domain-general process. RCJ and FOK judgments produced similar ERP waveforms within the memory tasks, but with different temporal dynamics; thus supporting the hypothesis that retrospective and prospective metacognitive judgments are distinct processes. Our ERP results also suggest that metacognitive judgments are linked to distributed neural substrates, rather than purely frontal lobe functioning. Furthermore, the role of intra-subject and inter-subject differences in metacognitive judgments across and within the memory tasks are highlighted.

A growing body of research suggests that some non-human animals are capable of making accurate metacognitive judgments. In previous studies, non-human animals have made either retrospective or prospective judgments (about how they did on a test or how they will do on a test, respectively). These two types of judgments are dissociable in humans. The current study tested the abilities of two rhesus macaque monkeys to make both retrospective and prospective judgments about their performance on the same memory task. Both monkeys had been trained previously to make retrospective confidence judgments. Both monkeys successfully demonstrated transfer of retrospective metacognitive judgments to the new memory task. Furthermore, both monkeys transferred their retrospective judgments to the prospective task (one, immediately, and one, following the elimination of a response bias). This study is the first to demonstrate both retrospective and prospective monitoring abilities in the same monkeys and on the same task, suggesting a greater level of flexibility in animals' metacognitive monitoring abilities than has been reported previously.

This study investigated the interactive effects of feedback, task difficulty, and metacognitive judgment on cognitive task performance. Sixty university students (aged between 20–25 years) were randomly assigned to either a feedback or a no-feedback group. The shortened version of Raven’s Progressive Matrices (consisting of three task sets) was used to assess the cognitive task performance. Task difficulty was increased with task sets. After each set, they rated their confidence on a 4-point Likert scale. The feedback group was informed of the number of correct responses. A 2 (feedback: yes vs no) × 3 (task difficulty: low vs medium vs high) × 2 (metacognitive judgement: low vs high) three-way mixed analysis of variances revealed a significant main effect of feedback on performance: participants who received feedback consistently outperformed those who did not. A significant interaction between feedback and task difficulty, F(1, 11) = 30.994, p < .001, η² = .156, indicated that feedback was particularly effective under high-difficulty conditions. However, none of the other main effects and interaction effects was found to be significant. The results emphasize the importance of feedback under high cognitive load. Future research should examine how individual differences and feedback types shape learning and strategy use. Bangladesh Journal of Psychology, Vol. 25, December 2025, pp. 68-79

We investigated the event-related potential (ERP) correlates of two metacognitive judgments, namely judgment of learning (JOL) and feeling of knowing (FOK) induced by a face-name recognition (FNR) task in 60 participants. The FNR produced N170 and P100 components at posterior, and an N100 component at anterior electrodes. Posterior P200, anterior N200 components were recorded during JOL and FOK judgments. Our data showed that ERP correlates of JOL and FOK emerge as rapidly as 200 ms following stimulus presentation, and these two metacognitive judgments are based on both perceptual fluency and conflict processes. However, these ERP components affected by the degree of JOL and FOK judgments. Thus, we concluded that even though JOL and FOK judgments produced similar ERP wave forms temporal dynamics of these two judgments are different. Also, our results support the hypothesis that metacognitive judgments are linked to distributed neural substrates rather than strictly to frontal lobe function.

Many researchers and educators have identified self-assessment as a vital aspect of professional self-regulation.1,2,3 This rationale has been the expressed motivation for a large number of studies of self-assessment ability in medical education, health professional education, and professions educat

If task-irrelevant sounds are present when someone is actively listening to speech, the irrelevant sounds can cause distraction, reducing word recognition performance and increasing listening effort. In some previous investigations into auditory distraction, the task-irrelevant stimuli were non-speech sounds (e.g., laughter, animal sounds, music), which are known to elicit a variety of emotional responses. Variations in the emotional response to a task-irrelevant sound could influence the distraction effect. The goal of this study was to examine the relationship between the arousal (exciting versus calming) or valence (positive versus negative) of task-irrelevant auditory stimuli and auditory distraction. Using non-speech sounds that have been used previously in a distraction task, we sought to determine whether stimulus characteristics of arousal or valence affected word recognition or verbal response times (which serve as a measure of behavioral listening effort). We anticipated that the perceived arousal and valence of task-irrelevant stimuli would be related to distraction from target stimuli. In an online listening task, 19 young adult listeners rated the valence and arousal of non-speech sounds, which previously served as task-irrelevant stimuli in studies of auditory distraction. Word recognition and verbal response time data from these previous studies were reanalyzed using the present data to evaluate the effect of valence or arousal stimulus category on the distraction effect in quiet and in noise. In addition, correlation analyses were conducted between ratings of valence, ratings of arousal, word recognition performance, and verbal response times. The presence of task-irrelevant stimuli affected word recognition performance. This effect was observed generally in quiet and for stimuli rated as exciting (in noise) or calming (in quiet). The presence of task-irrelevant stimuli also affected reaction times. Background noise increased verbal response times by approximately 35 msec. In addition, all task-irrelevant stimuli, regardless of valence or arousal category, increased verbal response times by more than 200 msec relative to the condition with no task-irrelevant stimuli. Valenced stimuli caused the largest distraction effect on response times; there was no difference in the distraction effect on verbal response times based on the stimulus arousal category. Correlation analyses between valence ratings and dependent variables (word recognition and reaction time) revealed that, in quiet, there was a weak, but statistically significant, relationship between valence ratings (absolute deviation from neutral) and word recognition scores; the more valenced a stimulus, the more distracting it was in terms of word recognition performance. This significant relationship between valence and word recognition was not evident when participants completed the speech task in noise. There was no relationship between stimulus ratings (arousal or valence) and reaction time in quiet or in noise. Valenced (positive and negative) or exciting task-irrelevant non-speech sounds can negatively affect word recognition and increase listening effort. Future study should consider the emotional content of task-irrelevant stimuli when evaluating potential distraction effects.

People believe most background sounds to disrupt their cognitive performance. An exception is music they like which is believed to improve cognitive performance. To examine the objective effects of music on cognitive performance, the serial-recall paradigm was used. Mozart’s sonata K. 448 – the music piece used in classical studies on the Mozart effect – caused distraction. However, with ongoing exposure to the music participants were able to adapt to some degree to the distracting effect of the music under conditions that increased the predictability of the sounds, suggesting that the development of a predictive model of the unfolding auditory input helped to diminish distraction. Retrospective metacognitive judgements indicated that the more participants liked the music the more likely they were to judge that it had helped their performance. However, serial recall was disrupted by the music irrespective of whether the music was liked or not.

IntroductionAttention deficit hyperactivity disorder is a common impairing neuropsychiatric disorder with onset in early childhood. Almost half of the children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder also experience a variety of motor-related dysfunctions ranging from fine/gross motor control problems to difficulties in maintaining balance.ObjectivesThe main purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of distractors two different auditory distractors namely, relaxing music and white noise on upright balance performance in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.MethodsWe compared upright balance performance and the involvement of different sensory systems in the presence of auditory distractors between school-aged children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (n = 26) and typically developing controls (n = 20). Neurocom SMART Balance Master Dynamic Posturography device was used for the sensory organization test. Sensory organization test was repeated three times for each participant in three different test environments.ResultsThe balance scores in the silence environment were lower in the attention deficit hyperactivity disorder group but the differences were not statistically significant. In addition to lower balance scores the visual and vestibular ratios were also lower. Auditory distractors affected the general balance performance positively for both groups. More challenging conditions, using an unstable platform with distorted somatosensory signals were more affected. Relaxing music was more effective in the control group, and white noise was more effective in the attention deficit hyperactivity disorder group and the positive effects of white noise became more apparent in challenging conditions.ConclusionTo the best of our knowledge, this is the first study evaluating balance performance in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder under the effects of auditory distractors. Although more studies are needed, our results indicate that auditory distractors may have enhancing effects on upright balance performance in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Effects of auditory distraction by task-irrelevant background speech on the immediate serial recall of verbal material are well established. Less is known about the influence of background speech on memory for visual configural information. A recent study demonstrated that face learning is disrupted by joyful music relative to soothing violin music and quiet. This pattern is parallel to findings in the serial-recall paradigm showing that auditory distraction is primarily caused by auditory changes. Here we connect these two streams of research by testing whether face learning is impaired by irrelevant speech. Participants learned faces either in quiet or while ignoring auditory changing-state sequences (sentential speech) or steady-state sequences (word repetitions). Face recognition was impaired by irrelevant speech relative to quiet. Furthermore, changing-state speech disrupted performance more than steady-state speech. The results were replicated in a second study using reversed speech, suggesting that the disruptive potential of the background speech does not depend on its semantic content. These findings thus demonstrate robust effects of auditory distraction on face learning. Theoretical explanations and applied implications are discussed.

To document the process by which metacognitive judgments ("online" monitoring of one's own cognitive performance during task completion) are made after traumatic brain injury (TBI). Sixteen community-dwelling adults with moderate to severe TBI and 16 matched healthy controls. Prospective, cross-sectional design. Metacognitive retrospective confidence judgments and reaction times were collected as participants performed a metamemory task. Adults with TBI did not differ from healthy peers in metacognitive accuracy; however, they took significantly longer to make retrospective confidence judgments. Retrospective confidence judgment reaction times were not consistently correlated to measures of processing speed in either sample. Adults with TBI engage in different postdecisional processes to make metacognitive judgments compared with healthy controls. Findings suggest that reaction times may be an important dimension of metacognition to assess clinically after TBI.