Cited by 190Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsMemory Processes and InfluencesVisual perception and processing mechanisms

The relation of the time of a judgment to its accuracy

Henmon, V. A. C.·1911·Psychological Review

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/h0074579

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • For healthy subjects with metacognitive sensitivity, confidence is positively associated with accuracy.

    “In general, for healthy subjects endowed with metacognitive sensitivity, when one is confident, one is more likely to be correct.”

    From How to measure metacognition (2014) · cites this paper as Henmon (1911)

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Henmon, V. A. C.
Corresponding author
Henmon, V. A. C.
Venue
Psychological Review
Published
1911-05
Volume
18
Issue
3
Pages
186-201
ISSN
  • 0033-295X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1471
OpenAlex
W1995192446
Cited by
190
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 4
FWCI
2.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Psychological Review (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
Keywords
judgment accuracy, decision time

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