{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03296703296703297, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014652014652014652, 'mean_word_length': 5.098214285714286, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evaluating semantic metamemory: Retrospective confidence judgements on the information subtest

ABSTRACT The current research explored the potential value of adding a supplementary measure of metamemory to the Information subtest of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - Third Edition (WAIS-III in Study 1) or Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV in Study 2) in order to assess its relationship to other neuropsychological measures and to brain injury. After completing the Information subtest, neuropsychological examinees were asked to make retrospective confidence judgements (RCJ) by rating their answer certainty in the original order of item administration. In Study 1 (N = 52) and study 2 (N = 30), correct answers were rated with significantly more certainty than wrong answers (termed a “confidence gap”), and in both studies, higher confidence for wrong answers was significantly correlated with poorer performance on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (for categories completed r = −.58 in Study 1, and r = −.47 in Study 2; for perseverative errors r = .44 in Study 1, and r = .45 in Study 2). In both studies, a number of examinees with positive CT findings had a very small or reversed confidence gap. These findings suggest that semantic metamemory is sensitive to executive functioning and brain injury and should be assessed in the neuropsychological examination.