Stephanie Cosentino1, Janet Metcalfe, Brittany Holmes, Jason Steffener, Yaakov Stern. 1. Cognitive Neuroscience Division of the Gertrude H. Sergievsky Center, Taub Institute for Research on Alzheimer's Disease and the Aging Brain, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY 10032, USA. sc2460@columbia.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Metacognitive methodologies are used to examine the integrity of self-referential processing in healthy adults and have been implemented to study disorders of the self-concept in neurologic and psychiatric populations. However, the extent to which metacognitive evaluations assess a uniquely self-evaluative capacity that cannot be explained fully by primary cognitive functions, demographics, or mood is not clear. The objective of the current study was to examine whether metamemory and a metacognitive test of agency shared a self-referential association that would not be explained by cognition, demographics, or mood. METHOD: Thirty-eight nondemented older adults (Mini Mental State Examination [MMSE] ≥24 and mean age = 68.13) participated in metacognitive testing and completed cognitive testing and mood questionnaires. Bivariate correlations were used to evaluate the association between metamemory and agency, and to determine the cognitive (memory, attention, and executive functioning), demographic (age and education), and mood (anxiety and depression) correlates of each. Correlates of metamemory and agency were then entered into linear regression models to determine whether any association between metacognitive measures remained. RESULTS: Metamemory was associated with agency judgments (n = 27), specifically those on self-controlled rather than computer-controlled trials (r = .41, p = .03). Regression results supported a role for agency in predicting metamemory, above and beyond memory and education (β = .39, p = .034). Metamemory was also an independent predictor of agency judgments (β = .36, p = .049). CONCLUSIONS: The interrelation between metamemory and agency judgments suggests that metacognitive testing captures an important aspect of self-referential processing not otherwise assessed in a standard cognitive evaluation and may provide unique information about self-evaluative capacities in clinical populations. PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved.
OBJECTIVE: Metacognitive methodologies are used to examine the integrity of self-referential processing in healthy adults and have been implemented to study disorders of the self-concept in neurologic and psychiatric populations. However, the extent to which metacognitive evaluations assess a uniquely self-evaluative capacity that cannot be explained fully by primary cognitive functions, demographics, or mood is not clear. The objective of the current study was to examine whether metamemory and a metacognitive test of agency shared a self-referential association that would not be explained by cognition, demographics, or mood. METHOD: Thirty-eight nondemented older adults (Mini Mental State Examination [MMSE] ≥24 and mean age = 68.13) participated in metacognitive testing and completed cognitive testing and mood questionnaires. Bivariate correlations were used to evaluate the association between metamemory and agency, and to determine the cognitive (memory, attention, and executive functioning), demographic (age and education), and mood (anxiety and depression) correlates of each. Correlates of metamemory and agency were then entered into linear regression models to determine whether any association between metacognitive measures remained. RESULTS: Metamemory was associated with agency judgments (n = 27), specifically those on self-controlled rather than computer-controlled trials (r = .41, p = .03). Regression results supported a role for agency in predicting metamemory, above and beyond memory and education (β = .39, p = .034). Metamemory was also an independent predictor of agency judgments (β = .36, p = .049). CONCLUSIONS: The interrelation between metamemory and agency judgments suggests that metacognitive testing captures an important aspect of self-referential processing not otherwise assessed in a standard cognitive evaluation and may provide unique information about self-evaluative capacities in clinical populations. PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved.
Authors: Danny Koren; Larry J Seidman; Michael Poyurovsky; Morris Goldsmith; Polina Viksman; Suzi Zichel; Ehud Klein Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2004-10-01 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Chlöé Farrer; Scott H Frey; John D Van Horn; Eugene Tunik; David Turk; Souheil Inati; Scott T Grafton Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2007-05-08 Impact factor: 5.357
Authors: David J Libon; Mark W Bondi; Catherine C Price; Melissa Lamar; Joel Eppig; Denene M Wambach; Christine Nieves; Lisa Delano-Wood; Tania Giovannetti; Carol Lippa; Anahid Kabasakalian; Stephanie Cosentino; Rod Swenson; Dana L Penney Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: Stephanie Cosentino; Adam M Brickman; Erica Griffith; Christian Habeck; Sarah Cines; Meagan Farrell; Danielle Shaked; Edward D Huey; Tamara Briner; Yaakov Stern Journal: Neuropsychologia Date: 2015-06-03 Impact factor: 3.139
Authors: Janet Metcalfe; Jared X Van Snellenberg; Pamela DeRosse; Peter Balsam; Anil K Malhotra Journal: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci Date: 2012-05-19 Impact factor: 6.237