{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013605442176870748, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003401360544217687, 'mean_word_length': 5.740458015267175, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Collaborative Metacognition in a Signal Detection Task

Decision makers working in teams generally achieve higher sensitivity than individual decision makers in a signal detection task. The current experiment asked whether metacognitive, or Type 2, signal detection judgments would show a similar effect. Thirty participants performed a signal detection task both individually and in groups. Measures of Type 1 and Type 2 sensitivity were calculated from participants’ confidence ratings. Robust evidence suggested that when working collaboratively, group metacognitive efficiency exceeded what the worse group members could achieve on their own, but was no different than the metacognitive efficiency of the better members. These results suggest that collaborative teams may assess their performance by defaulting to the judgment of the most meta-cognitively sensitive team member.