Is visual metacognition associated with autistic traits? A regression analysis shows no link between visual metacognition and Autism-Spectrum Quotient scores.
Autism
Computational Psychiatry
Metacognition
Journal
Consciousness and cognition
ISSN: 1090-2376
Titre abrégé: Conscious Cogn
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9303140
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2023
04 2023
Historique:
received:
13
09
2022
revised:
27
02
2023
accepted:
03
03
2023
medline:
11
4
2023
pubmed:
20
3
2023
entrez:
19
3
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Metacognition -the human ability to recognize correct decisions- is a key cognitive process linked to learning and development. Several recent studies investigated the relationship between metacognition and autism. However, the evidence is still inconsistent. While some studies reported autistic people having lower levels of metacognitive sensitivity, others did not. Leveraging the fact that autistic traits are present in the general population, our study investigated the relationship between visual metacognition and autistic traits in a sample of 360 neurotypical participants. We measured metacognition as the correspondence between confidence and accuracy in a visual two alternative forced choice task. Autistic-traits were assessed through the Autism-spectrum Quotient (AQ) score. A regression analysis revealed no statistically significant association between autistic traits and metacognition or confidence. Furthermore, we found no link between AQ sub-scales and metacognition. We do not find support for the hypothesis that autistic traits are associated with metacognition in the general population.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36934669
pii: S1053-8100(23)00039-9
doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2023.103502
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
103502Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.