Small Navigation Menu

Primary Menu

Is Concept Appraisal Modulated by Procedural or Declarative Manipulations?

Citation: Shea, Nicholas and Thorne, Sapphira and Smortchkova, Joulia and Quilty-dunn, Jake and Hampton, James A (2022) Is Concept Appraisal Modulated by Procedural or Declarative Manipulations? Frontiers in Psychology, 13 . ISSN 13:774629.

Thorne et al_22_Concept Appr Mod_FrontPsych_OA.pdf

Creative Commons: Attribution-No Derivative Works 4.0

A recent study has established that thinkers reliably engage in epistemic appraisals of concepts of natural categories. Here, five studies are reported which investigated the effects of different manipulations of category learning context on appraisal of the concepts learnt. It was predicted that dimensions of concept appraisal could be affected by manipulating either procedural factors (spacing of learning, perceptual fluency) or declarative factors (causal knowledge about categories). While known effects of these manipulations on metacognitive judgements such as category learning judgements and confidence at test were replicated, procedural factors had no reliable effects on the dimensions of concept appraisal. Effects of declarative manipulations on some forms of concept appraisal were observed.

Creators: Shea, Nicholas (0000-0002-2032-5705) and Thorne, Sapphira and Smortchkova, Joulia and Quilty-dunn, Jake and Hampton, James A and
Official URL:
Subjects: Philosophy
Keywords: metacognitive judgements, concept appraisal, knowledge, fluency, metacognition, concepts
Divisions: Institute of Philosophy
Collections: London Philosophy Papers
  • 22 March 2022 (published)
  • 10 January 2022 (accepted)
References: Cappelen, H. (2018). Fixing Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., and Buchner, A. (2007). G∗Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav. Res. Methods 39, 175–191. doi: 10.3758/BF03193146 Gelman, S. A. (2004). Psychological essentialism in children. Trends Cogn. Sci. 8, 404–409. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.07.001 Haslam, N., Rothschild, L., and Ernst, D. (2000). Essentialist beliefs about social categories. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 39, 113–127. doi: 10.1348/01446660016 4363 Jacoby, L. L., Wahlheim, C. N., and Coane, J. H. (2010). Test-enhanced learning of natural concepts: effects on recognition memory, classification, and metacognition. J. Exp. Psychol. 36:1441. doi: 10.1037/a0020636 JASP (2021). JASP Team JASP Windows 64. Netherlands: JASP Team. Kaspar, K., Wehlitz, T., von Knobelsdorff, S., Wulf, T., and von Saldern, M. A. O. (2015). A matter of font type: The effect of serifs on the evaluation of scientific abstracts. Internat. J. Psychol. 50, 372–378. doi: 10.1002/ijop.12160 Koriat, A., and Levy-Sadot, R. (1999). Processes underlying metacognitive judgments: Information-based and experience-based monitoring of one’s own knowledge. Psychology 1999:53344952. Kornell, N., and Bjork, R. A. (2008). Learning concepts and categories: Is spacing the “enemy of induction”? Psycholog. Sci. 19, 585–592. Kornell, N., Castel, A. D., Eich, T. S., and Bjork, R. A. (2010). Spacing as the friend of both memory and induction in young and older adults. Psychol. Aging 25:498. Logan, J. M., Castel, A. D., Haber, S., and Viehman, E. J. (2012). Metacognition and the spacing effect: the role of repetition, feedback, and instruction on judgments of learning for massed and spaced rehearsal. Metacogn. Learn. 7, 175–195. doi: 10.1007/s11409-012-9090-3 Machery, E. (2017). Philosophy Within Its Proper Bounds. Oxford: OUP. Medin, D. L., and Ortony, A. (1989). “Psychological essentialism,” in Similarity and analogical reasoning, eds S. Vosniadou and A. Ortony (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press), 179–195. Press, S. J. (1980). Bayesian inference in MANOVA. Handbook Stat. 1, 117–132. doi: 10.1016/S0169-7161(80)01006-1 Proust, J. (2013). The philosophy of metacognition: Mental agency and self�awareness. Oxford: OUP Oxford. Qualtrics (2018). Qualtrics (Version August 2020). Provo: Qualtrics. Rehder, B., and Hastie, R. (2004). Category coherence and category-based property induction. Cognition 91, 113–153. doi: 10.1016/s0010-0277(03)00167-7 Schwarz, N. (2010). “Meaning in context: Metacognitive experiences,” in The mind in context, eds B. Mesquita, L. F. Barrett, and E. R. Smith (New York, NY: Guilford Press), 105–125. Smortchkova, J., and Shea, N. (2020). Metacognitive development and conceptual change in children. Rev. Philosop. Psychol. 11, 745–763. doi: 10.1007/s13164- 020-00477-7 Son, L. K. (2004). Spacing one’s study: evidence for a metacognitive control strategy. J. Exp. Psychol. 30:601. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.30.3.601 Thomasson, A. L. (2017). Metaphysics and Conceptual Negotiation. Philosoph. Issues 27, 364–382. doi: 10.1111/phis.12106 Thorne, S. R., Quilty-Dunn, J., Smortchkova, J., Shea, N., and Hampton, J. A. (2021). Concept Appraisal. Cogn. Sci. 45:e12978. Undorf, M., Zimdahl, M. F., and Bernstein, D. M. (2017). Perceptual fluency contributes to effects of stimulus size on judgments of learning. J. Mem. Lang. 92, 293–304. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2016.07.003 Wahlheim, C. N., Dunlosky, J., and Jacoby, L. L. (2011). Spacing enhances the learning of natural concepts: An investigation of mechanisms, metacognition, and aging. Mem. Cogn. 39, 750–763. doi: 10.3758/s13421-010-0063-y Wang, J., and Xing, Q. (2019). Metacognitive illusion in category learning


View details