{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03779840848806366, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009283819628647215, 'mean_word_length': 6.2548076923076925, '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}}
Assessing Metacognition during a Cognitive Task: Impact of “On-line” Metacognitive Questions on Neuropsychological Performances in a Non-clinical Sample

Abstract Whereas metacognition is of great interest for neuropsychological practice, little is known about the impact of metacognitive questions during a neuropsychological assessment. This study explored the impact of measuring “on-line” metacognitive processes on neuropsychological performances in a non-clinical population. Participants were randomly assigned to a “standard” or a “metacognitive” neuropsychological test procedure. The “standard” procedure assessed executive functions (Modified Card Sorting Test), episodic memory (“Rappel libre Rappel indicé” 16), working memory (digit span test Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale III) and social cognition (Faces Test). In the “metacognitive” procedure, two questions were added after each item of these tests to evaluate “on-line” metacognitive monitoring and control. Working memory performances were better and episodic memory performances lower in the “metacognitive” versus the “standard” procedure. No significant difference was found concerning executive functioning or social cognition. The assessment of “on-line” metacognition might improve working memory performances by enhancing concentration, and might impair episodic memory performances by acting as a distractor. These findings may have implications for the development of cognitive remediation programs. (JINS, 2014, 20, 547–554)