The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Errors committed with high confidence are hypercorrected.
Abstract
The relation between people's confidence in the accuracy of an erroneous response and their later performance was investigated. Most models of human memory suggest that the higher a person's confidence, the stronger the item (in the context of the eliciting cue) that is retrieved from memory. In recall, stronger associates to a cue interfere with competing associates more than do weaker associates. This state of affairs implies that errors endorsed with high, rather than low, confidence should be more difficult to correct by learning the correct response feedback. In contrast to the authors' expectations, highly confident errors were the most likely to be corrected in a subsequent retest. Participants nearly always endorsed the correct response in cases in which both the correct response and the original erroneous response were generated at retest, suggesting that people possess a refined metacognitive ability to know what is correct and incorrect.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“There is also evidence that greater attention is given to feedback that does not match expectations (e.g., Butterfield & Metcalfe, 2001;Fazio & Marsh, 2009)”
From The benefit of generating errors during learning (2014) · cites this paper as Butterfield & Metcalfe, 2001
In the citing paper
“The authors suggested that this effect is due to the corrective feedback being more surprising for high-confidence errors than for low-confidence errors, and that the ensuing increased arousal facilitates encoding of the correct answer.”
From Predicting as a learning strategy (2021) · cites this paper as Butterfield & Metcalfe, 2001
In the citing paper
“The hypercorrection effect refers to the finding that erroneous responses committed with high confidence are more likely to be corrected than erroneous responses committed with low confidence (Butterfield & Metcalfe, 2001).”
From Predicting as a learning strategy (2021) · cites this paper as Butterfield & Metcalfe, 2001
Citations
Cites
Human Memory: A Proposed System and its Control Processes
Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968) · Psychology of Learning and Motivation · doi:10.1016/s0079-7421(08)60422-3 · Cited by 7,216
The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Advances in Research and Theory
(2010) · The Psychology of learning and motivation/The psychology of learning and motivation · doi:10.1016/c2009-0-62209-1 · Cited by 6,035
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory
Bourne, L. E. (1977) · Cited by 4,328
“Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct”
Ford, G. G. (2000) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781482274400-4 · Cited by 4,258
Raaijmakers, J. G., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1981) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.88.2.93 · Cited by 1,696
The generation effect: delineation of a phenomenon
Slamecka, N. J., & Graf, P. (1978) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.4.6.592 · Cited by 1,659
A retrieval model for both recognition and recall.
Gillund, G., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1984) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.91.1.1 · Cited by 1,546
Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct
American Psychological Association (1992) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.47.12.1597 · Cited by 1,362
Recognition and retrieval processes in free recall.
Anderson, J. R., & Bower, G. H. (1972) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0033773 · Cited by 820
The Psychology of Human Learning
Newman, E. B., McGeoch, J. A., & Irion, A. L. (1953) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1418975 · Cited by 793
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Loftus, 1979, Eyewitness testimony.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100612453266 · Cited by 3,138
Self-Regulated Learning: Beliefs, Techniques, and Illusions
Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143823 · Cited by 1,468
Why do beliefs about intelligence influence learning success? A social cognitive neuroscience model
Mangels, J. A., Butterfield, B., Lamb, J., Good, C., & Dweck, C. S. (2006) · Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience · doi:10.1093/scan/nsl013 · Cited by 681
Self-citationMetcalfe, J. (2016) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-044022 · Cited by 615
Self-citationFeedback enhances the positive effects and reduces the negative effects of multiple-choice testing
Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L. (2008) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/mc.36.3.604 · Cited by 457
Metadata
- Authors
- Butterfield, B., & Metcalfe, J.
- Affiliations
- Columbia University (US)
- ORCID
- Metcalfe, Janet
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
- Published
- 2001
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1491-1494
- ISSN
- 0278-7393 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1285
- OpenAlex
- W2003949574
- Cited by
- 223
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 0.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health (MH8066)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
- Keywords
- metacognition, memory confidence, memory errors, error correction, metacognitive confidence, retrieval interference, associative strength, metacognitive accuracy
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Female, Humans, Knowledge of Results, Psychological, Learning, Male, Memory, Self-Assessment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
