IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/judgdm/v18y2023ip-_15.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Systematic metacognitive reflection helps people discover far-sighted decision strategies: A process-tracing experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Becker, Frederic
  • Wirzberger, Maria
  • Pammer-Schindler, Viktoria
  • Srinivas, Srinidhi
  • Lieder, Falk

Abstract

Short-sighted decisions can have devastating consequences, and teaching people to make their decisions in a more far-sighted way is challenging. Previous research found that reflecting on one’s behavior can boost learning from success and failure. Here, we explore the potential benefits of guiding people to reflect on whether and how they thought about what to do (i.e., systematic metacognitive reflection). We devised a series of Socratic questions that prompt people to reflect on their decision-making and tested their effectiveness in a process-tracing experiment with a 5-step planning task ( $N=265$ ). Each participant went through several cycles of making a series of decisions and then either reflecting on how they made those decisions, answering unrelated questions, or moving on to the next decision right away. We found that systematic metacognitive reflection helps people discover adaptive, far-sighted decision strategies faster. Our results suggest that systematic metacognitive reflection is a promising approach to boosting people’s decision-making competence.

Suggested Citation

  • Becker, Frederic & Wirzberger, Maria & Pammer-Schindler, Viktoria & Srinivas, Srinidhi & Lieder, Falk, 2023. "Systematic metacognitive reflection helps people discover far-sighted decision strategies: A process-tracing experiment," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18, pages 1-1, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:18:y:2023:i::p:-_15
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1930297523000165/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:18:y:2023:i::p:-_15. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jdm .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.