The variety of metacognitive feelings: Different phenomena or different terms?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu16.2018.302Abstract
Conscious experiences accompanying cognition and related to its process are called “metacognitive feelings”. There are several dozens of terms for designating their varieties: “a feeling of confidence”, “a feeling of warmth”, “a feeling of knowing”, “a feeling of familiarity” and many others. Some researchers suggest that these terms denote different mental phenomena, while others point to their similarity. The article contains descriptions of metacognitive feelings and provides a review of their classifications. We distinguish two approaches to understanding the functions and content of metacognitive processes. The “specific approach” suggests that metacognitive experiences initially provide the information about their source, allowing to monitor and to control mental processes. According to the “nonspecific approach”, metacognitive experiences serve as a signal, reflecting the results of unconscious processing without communicating the content and the source of underlying processes. In this case, the aim of consciousness is not to directly control the underlying processes, but to identify the causes of the nonspecific signal. The problem of the variety of metacognitive feelings is resolved in different ways within the two approaches. In the specific approach, the diversity of metacognitions derives from different mental processes, resulting in distinguishable subjective experiences. In the nonspecific approach, metacognitive feelings arise at later stages of information processing as a result of attribution of the nonspecific signal to certain mental phenomena or the external world. We conclude that recently there has been a gradual shift from the specific approach to the nonspecific approach, but only a few authors explicitly formulate their position.
Keywords:
metacognition, metacognitive processes, subjective judgments, attribution, fluency of processing, consciousness, cognitive unconscious
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Литература
Джеймс У. Психология. М.: Педагогика, 1991. 368 с.
Brown R., McNeill D. The “tip of the tongue” phenomenon // J.Verbal Learning Verbal Behav. Academic Press. 1966. Vol. 5, N 4. P. 325–337.
Yaniv I., Meyer D.E. Activation and metacognition of inaccessible stored information: potential bases for incubation effects in problem solving // J.Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 1987. Vol. 13, N 2. P. 187–205.
Metcalfe J., Schwartz B.L., Bloom P.A. The tip-of-the-tongue state and curiosity // Cogn. Res. Princ. Implic. 2017. Vol. 2, 1. P. 31.
Шмонина О.Д., Клайман В.О., Федорова А.И., Четвериков А.А. «Чувство на-кончике-языка» как маркер наличия доступа к забытому слову // Российский журнал когнитивной науки. 2014. Т. 1, N 3. С. 18–30.
Metcalfe J. A computational modeling approach to novelty monitoring, metacognition, and frontal lobe dysfunction // Metacognition: Knowing about knowing / ed. J.Metcalfe, A. Shimamura. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1994. P. 137–156.
Mangan B. What Feeling Is the “Feeling of Knowing?” // Conscious. Cogn. Academic Press. 2000. Vol. 9, N 4. P. 538–544.
Mangan B.B. Meaning and the Structure of Consciousness: An Essay in Psycho-Aesthetics. Berkeley: University of California, 1991. 346 p.
Mangan B. Taking Phenomenology Seriously: The “Fringe” and Its Implications for Cognitive Research // Conscious. Cogn. Academic Press. 1993. Vol. 2, N 2. P. 89–108.
Скотникова И.Г. Проблема уверенности: история и современное состояние // Психологический журнал. 2002. Т. 21, № 1. С. 52–60.
Bowden E.M. The effect of reportable and unreportable hints on anagram solution and the aha!- experience // Conscious. Cogn. Elsevier. 1997. Vol. 6, N 4. P. 545–573.
Dorfman J., Shames V.A., Kihlstrom J.F. Intuition, incubation, and insight: implicit cognition in problem solving // Implicit Cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. P. 257–296.
Пуанкаре А. Математическое творчество // Хрестоматия по общей психологии. Психология мышления / под ред. Ю.Б.Гиппенрейтер, В.В.Петухова. М.: Изд-во МГУ, 1981. С. 356–365.
Кёлер В. Исследование интеллекта человекоподобных обезьян // Основные направления психологии в классических трудах. Гештальт-психология. M.: АСТ-ЛТД, 1998. С. 35–270.
Вертгеймер М. Продуктивное мышление. М.: Прогресс, 1987. 336 с.
Дункер К.Качественное (экспериментальное и теоретическое) исследование продуктивного мышления // Психология мышления: сб. переводов с английского и немецкого / под ред. А.М.Матюшкина. М.: Прогресс, 1965. С. 21–85.
Newell A., Shaw J.C., Simon H.A. The processes of creative thinking. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation, 1958. 82 p.
MacGregor J.N., Ormerod T.C., Chronicle E.P. Information processing and insight: a process model of performance on the nine-dot and related problems // J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 2001. Vol. 27, N 1. P. 176–201.
Ellis J.J., Glaholt M.G., Reingold E.M. Eye movements reveal solution knowledge prior to insight // Conscious. Cogn. 2011. Vol. 20, N 3. P. 768–776.
Weisberg R.W. Toward an integrated theory of insight in problem solving // Think. Reason. 2015. Vol. 21, N 1. P. 5–39.
Полани М. Страстность научного познания // Личностное знание. М.: Прогресс, 1985. С. 193–247.
Hart J.T. Memory and the feeling-of-knowing experience // J.Educ. Psychol. 1965. Vol. 56, N 4. P. 208–216.
Hart J.T. Methodological note on feeling-of-knowing experiments // J.Educ. Psychol. 1966. Vol. 57, N 6. P. 347–349.
Adams P.A., Adams J.K. Confidence in the Recognition and Reproduction of Words Difficult to Spell // Am. J.Psychol. 1960. Vol. 73, N 4. P. 544.
Oskamp S. Overconfidence in case-study judgments // J.Consult. Psychol. American Psychological Association. 1965. Vol. 29, N 3. P. 261–265.
Flavell J.H. Metacognitive Aspects of Problem Solving // The Nature of Intelligence / ed. L.B.Resnick. Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum, 1976. P. 231–235.
Flavell J.H. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry // Am. Psychol. 1979. Vol. 34, N 10. P. 906–911.
Hartman H.J. Developing students’ metacognitive knowledge and skills // Metacognition in learning and instruction. Dordrecht: Springer, 2001. P. 33–68.
Pintrich P.R. The Role of Metacognitive Knowledge in Learning, Teaching, and Assessing // Theory Pract. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. 2002. Vol. 41, N 4. P. 219–225.
Harris K.R., Santangelo T., Graham S. Metacognition and strategies instruction in writing // Metacognition, Strategy Use, and Instruction. New York: The Guilford Press, 2010. P. 226–256.
Glucksberg S., McCloskey M. Decisions about ignorance: Knowing that you don’t know // J.Exp. Psychol. Hum. Learn. Mem. 1981. Vol. 7, N 5. P. 311–325.
Moraitou D., Efklides A. The blank in the mind questionnaire (BIMQ) // Eur. J.Psychol. Assess. 2009. Vol. 25, N 2. P. 115–122.
Lawless H., Engen T. Associations to odors: Interference, mnemonics, and verbal labeling // J.Exp. Psychol. Hum. Learn. Mem. 1977. Vol. 3, N 1. P. 52–59.
Brown A.L. Knowing when, where, and how to remember: A problem of metacognition // Adv. Instr. Psychol. 1978. Vol. 1. P. 225–253.
Arango-Muñoz S., Michaelian K. Epistemic feelings, epistemic emotions: Review and introduction to the focus section // Philos. Inq. 2014. Vol. 2, N 1. P. 97–122.
Schwartz B. Sources of information in metamemory: Judgments of learning and feelings of knowing // Psychon. Bull. Rev. 1994. Vol. 1, N 3. P. 357–375.
Koriat A. Metacognition and consciousness // The Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness / ed. P.D.Zelazo, M.Moscovitch, E.Thompson. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007. P. 289–325.
Dokic J. Seeds of self-knowledge: noetic feelings and metacognition // Foundations of metacognition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2012. P. 302–321.
Четвериков А.А., Одайник А.С. Модели субъективной оценки эффективности решения когнитивных задач: Часть 1. Теории дополнительной оценки и теории частичного доступа // Вестник СПбГУ. Серия 16. Психология. Педагогика. 2013. № 3. С. 55–61.
Четвериков А.А., Одайник А.С. Модели субъективной оценки эффективности решения когнитивных задач: Часть 2. Теории косвенной оценки // Вестник СПбГУ. Серия 16. Психология. Педагогика. 2014. № 1. С. 117–125.
Nelson T., Narens L. Metamemory: A Theoretical Framework and New Findings // Psychol. Learn. Motiv. 1990. Vol. 26. P. 125–173.
Nelson T.O. Consciousness and metacognition // Am. Psychol. 1996. Vol. 51, N 2. P. 102–116.
Arango-Muñoz S. The nature of epistemic feelings // Philos. Psychol. 2014. Vol. 27, N 2. P. 193–211.
Ackerman R., Thompson V.A. Meta-Reasoning: Monitoring and Control of Thinking and Reasoning // Trends Cogn. Sci. Elsevier Ltd. 2017. Vol. 21, N 8. P. 607–617.
Koriat A. The Feeling of Knowing: Some Metatheoretical Implications for Consciousness and Control // Conscious. Cogn. 2000. Vol. 9, N 2. P. 149–171.
Epstein S. Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious // Am. Psychol. 1994. Vol. 49, N 8. P. 709.
Evans J. S.B.T. In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning // Trends Cogn. Sci. Elsevier Current Trends. 2003. Vol. 7, N 10. P. 454–459.
Evans J. S.B.T., Over D.E. Rationality in the selection task: Epistemic utility versus uncertainty reduction // Psychol. Rev. 1996. Vol. 103, N 2. P. 356–363.
Stanovich K.E., West R.F. Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate? // Behav. Brain Sci. 2000. Vol. 23, N 5. P. 645–665.
Tulving E. Organization of memory: Quo vadis? // The cognitive neurosciences / ed. M. S.Gazzaniga. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995. P. 839–847.
Metcalfe J., Son L.K. Anoetic, noetic, and autonoetic metacognition // The foundations of metacognition / ed. M.J.Beran, J.Brandl, J.Perner, J.Proust. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2012. P. 289–301.
Price M.C., Norman E. Intuitive decisions on the fringes of consciousness: Are they conscious and does it matter? // Judgm. Decis. Mak. 2008. Vol. 3, N 1. P. 28–41.
Mangan B. Sensation’s Ghost: The Non-Sensory “Fringe” of Consciousness // Psyche (Stuttg). 2001. Vol. 7, N 18. URL: http://journalpsyche.org/files/0xaa9b.pdf (дата обращения: 10.02.2018).
Price M.C. Measuring the fringes of experience // Psyche. 2002. Vol. 8, N 16. URL: http://journalpsyche.org/files/0xaaac.pdf (дата обращения: 10.02.2018).
Аллахвердов В.М. Сознание — кажущееся и реальное // Методология и история психологии. 2009. Т. 4, № 1. С. 137–150.
Аллахвердов В.М. Психика и сознание в логике познания // Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Серия 16. Психология. Педагогика. 2016. T. 16, № 1. С. 35–46.
Huntsinger J.R., Clore G.L. Emotion and social metacognition // Soc. metacognition. New York: Psychology Press, 2012. P. 199–217.
Koriat A., Nussinson R., Bless H., Shaked N. Information-based and experience-based metacognitive judgments: Evidence from subjective confidence // A Handb. Mem. metamemory. 2008. P. 117–136.
Schwarz N. Metacognition // APA handbook of personality and social psychology. Vol. 1: Attitudes and social cognition / ed. by M.Mikulincer, P.R. Shaver. Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association, 2015. P. 203–229.
Tulving E. How many memory systems are there? // American Psychologist. 1985. Vol. 40, N 4. P. 385–398.
Leonesio R.J., Nelson T.O. Do Different Metamemory Judgments Tap the Same Underlying Aspects of Memory? // J.Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 1990. N 3. P. 464–470.
Efklides A. The Systemic Nature of Metacognitive Experiences // Metacognition. Boston, MA: Springer US, 2002. P. 19–34.
Kihlstrom J.F., Shames V.A., Dorfman J. Intimations of memory and thought // Implicit memory and metacognition / ed. L.M.Reder. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1996. P. 1–23.
Metcalfe J. Premonitions of Insight Predict Impending Error // J.Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 1986. Vol. 12, N 4. P. 623–634.
Metcalfe J., Wiebe D. Intuition in insight and noninsight problem solving // Mem. Cognit. 1987. Vol. 15, N 3. P. 238–246.
Koriat A., Adiv S. The Self-Consistency Theory of Subjective Confidence // The Oxford handbook of metamemory / ed. J.Dunlosky, S.Tauber. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2015. Vol. 1. P. 127–147.
Danek A.H., Fraps T., Müller A., Grothe B., Öllinger M. It’s a kind of magic-what self-reports can reveal about the phenomenology of insight problem solving // Front. Psychol. 2014. Vol. 5. P. 1408.
Dunning D., Johnson K., Ehrlinger J., Kruger J. Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence // Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2003. Vol. 12, N 3. P. 83–87.
Zajonc R.B. Attitudinal effects of mere exposure // J.Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1968. Vol. 9, N 2, pt. 2. P. 1–27.
Koriat A. How Do We Know That We Know? The Accessibility Model of the Feeling of Knowing // Psychol. Rev. ERIC. 1993. Vol. 100, N 4. P. 609–639.
Reder L.M., Ritter F.E. What Determines Initial Feeling of Knowing? Familiarity With Question Terms, Not With the Answer // Learn. Mem. 1992. Vol. 18, N 3. P. 435–451.
Metcalfe J., Schwartz B.L., Joaquim S.G. The cue-familiarity heuristic in metacognition. // J.Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 1993. Vol. 19, N 4. P. 851–861.
Whittlesea B.W.A., Williams L.D. Why do strangers feel familiar, but friends don’t? A discrepancy-attribution account of feelings of familiarity // Acta Psychol. (Amst). Elsevier. 1998. Vol. 98, N 2–3. P. 141–165.
Whittlesea B.W., Williams L.D. The discrepancy-attribution hypothesis: I.The heuristic basis of feelings of familiarity // J.Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 2001. Vol. 27, N 1. P. 3–13.
Аллахвердов В.М. Сознание как парадокс. СПб.: ДНК, 2000. 528 с. 76. Koriat A. When Are Two Heads Better than One and Why? // Science. 2012. Vol. 336, N 6079. P. 360–362.
Reber R., Schwarz N. Effects of Perceptual Fluency on Judgments of Truth // Conscious. Cogn. 1999. Vol. 8, N 3. P. 338–342.
Reber R., Schwarz N., Winkielman P. Processing Fluency and Aesthetic Pleasure: Is Beauty in the Perceiver’s Processing Experience? // Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 2004. Vol. 8, N 4. P. 364–382.
Topolinski S., Strack F. The architecture of intuition: Fluency and affect determine intuitive judgments of semantic and visual coherence and judgments of grammaticality in artificial grammar learning // J.Exp. Psychol. Gen. American Psychological Association. 2009. Vol. 138, N 1. P. 39.
Winkielman P., Cacioppo J.T. Mind at ease puts a smile on the face: Psychophysiological evidence that processing facilitation elicits positive affect // J.Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2001. Vol. 81, N 6. P. 989.
Topolinski S., Bakhtiari G., Erle T.M. Can I cut the Gordian tnok? The impact of pronounceability, actual solvability, and length on intuitive problem assessments of anagrams // Cognition. Elsevier. 2016. Vol. 146. P. 439–452.
Jacoby L.L., Allan L.G., Collins J.C., Larwill A.K. Memory influences subjective experience: Noise judgments // J.Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 1988. Vol. 14, N 2. P. 240–247.
Kelley C.M., Rhodes M.G. Making sense and nonsense of experience: Attributions in memory and judgment // Psychol. Learn. Motiv. 2002. Vol. 41. P. 293–320.
Novemsky N., Dhar R., Schwarz N., Simonson I. Preference fluency in choice // J.Mark. Res. American Marketing Association. 2007. Vol. 44, N 3. P. 347–356.
Eldridge L.L., Knowlton B.J., Furmanski C. S. Remembering episodes: a selective role for the hippocampus during retrieval // Nat. Neurosci. 2000. Vol. 3, N 11. P. 1149–1152.
Eldridge L.L. A Dissociation of Encoding and Retrieval Processes in the Human Hippocampus // J.Neurosci. 2005. Vol. 25, N 13. P. 3280–3286.
Rubin D.C., Schrauf R.W., Gulgoz S., Naka M. Cross-cultural variability of component processes in autobiographical remembering: Japan, Turkey, and the USA // Memory. Taylor & Francis. 2007. Vol. 15, N 5. P. 536–547.
Головина Е.В., Скотникова И.Г., Эллиот М.А. Феномен уверенности и его проявления в русской и немецкой культурах // Экспериментальная психология. 2009. Т. 2, N 1. С. 23–34.
Еременко В.И. Воспоминание и знание как формы переживания прошлого: автореф. дис. … канд. психол. наук. М., 2007. 26 с. 90. Titchener E.B. Memory and imagination // A Text-book of Psychology. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1928. P. 396–426.
Kinoshita S. Feeling of Familiarity // Metacognition: Process, Function and Use / ed. P.Chambres, M.Izaute, P.-J.Marescaux. Boston, MA: Springer US, 2002. P. 79–90.
Tulving E. Memory and consciousness // Can. Psychol. Can. 1985. Vol. 26, N 1. P. 1–12.
Kinoshita S. Masked target priming effects on feeling-of-knowing and feeling-of-familiarity judgments // Acta Psychol. (Amst). 1997. Vol. 97, N 2. P. 183–199.
Mandler G. Recognizing: The Judgment of Previous Occurrence // Psychol. Rev. 1980. Vol. 81, N 3. P. 211–252.
Miner A.C., Reder L.M. A new look at feeling of knowing: Its metacognitive role in regulating question answering // Metacognition: Knowing about knowing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1994. P. 47–70.
Koriat A., Lieblich I. What does a person in a “TOT” state know that a person in a “don’t know” state doesn’t know // Mem. Cognit. Springer-Verlag. 1974. Vol. 2, N 4. P. 647–655.
Windschitl P.D., Wells G.L. Measuring psychological uncertainty: Verbal versus numeric methods // J.Exp. Psychol. Appl. American Psychological Association. 1996. Vol. 2, N 4. P. 343–364.
Jonsson F.U., Olsson M.J. Olfactory metacognition // Chem. Senses. Oxford University Press. 2003. Vol. 28, N 7. P. 651–658.
Efklides A., Touroutoglou A. Prospective Memory Failure and the Metacognitive Experience of “Blank in the Mind” // Trends and prospects in metacognition research. New York: Springer, 2010. P.105–126.
Jönsson F.U., Lindström B.R. Using a multidimensional scaling approach to investigate the underlying basis of ease of learning judgments // Scand. J.Psychol. 2010. Vol. 51, N 2. P. 103–108.
Arbuckle T.Y., Cuddy L.L. Discrimination of item strength at time of presentation // J.Exp. Psychol. 1969. Vol. 81, N 1. P. 126–131.
Koriat A. Monitoring one’s own knowledge during study: A cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning // J.Exp. Psychol. Gen. 1997. Vol. 126, N 4. P. 349–370.
Dunlosky J., Serra M.J., Matvey G., Rawson K.A. Second-Order Judgments About Judgments of Learning // J.Gen. Psychol. 2005. Vol. 132, N 4. P. 335–346.
Bjork R.A. Assessing our own competence: Heuristics and illusions // Attention and performance. Attention and performance XVII: Cognitive regulation of performance: Interaction of theory and application. Cambridge, MA, US: The MIT Press, 1999. P. 435–459.
Koriat A., Bjork R.A. Illusions of competence in monitoring one’s knowledge during study // J.Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 2005. Vol. 31, N 2. P. 187–194.
Ehrlinger J., Dunning D. How Chronic Self-views Influence (and Potentially Mislead) Estimates of Performance // J.Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2003. Vol. 84, N 1. P. 5–17.
Payne S.J., Duggan G.B. Giving up problem solving // Mem. Cognit. 2011. Vol. 39, N 5. P. 902–913.
Touroutoglou A., Efklides A. Cognitive Interruption as an Object of Metacognitive Monitoring: Feeling of Difficulty and Surprise // Trends and Prospects in Metacognition Research. Boston, MA: Springer US, 2010. P. 171–208. 109.Dewey J. How We Think. Boston; New York; Chicago: D.C.Health & Co. Publishers, 1910. 228 p.
Efklides A., Samara A., Petropoulou M. Feeling of difficulty: An aspect of monitoring that influences control // Eur. J.Psychol. Educ. Springer Netherlands. 1999. Vol. 14, N 4. P. 461–476.
Wierzchoń M., Asanowicz D., Paulewicz B., Cleeremans A. Subjective measures of consciousness in artificial grammar learning task // Conscious. Cogn. 2012. Vol. 21, N 3. P. 1141–1153.
Спиридонов В.Ф. Реален ли инсайт? // Теоретические и прикладные проблемы психологии мышления: Труды III конференции молодых ученых памяти К.Дункера. М.: РГГУ, 2012. С. 42–50.
Медынцев А.А. Влияние иррелевантной информации на процесс разгадывания анаграмм // СИСП. 2012. № 11. С. 37. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/vliyanie-irrelevantnoy-informatsii-naprotsess-razgadyvaniya-anagramm (дата обращения: 10.02.2018).
Владимиров И.Ю., Маркина П.Н. Объективный и субъективный тупик в процессе инсайтного решения // Вестник ЯрГУ. Серия «Гуманитарные науки». 2017. Т. 3, № 41. С. 76–80.
Koriat A. Subjective confidence in perceptual judgments: A test of the self-consistency model // J.Exp. Psychol. Gen. 2011. Vol. 140, N 1. P. 117–139.
Persaud N., McLeod P., Cowey A. Post-decision wagering objectively measures awareness // Nat. Neurosci. 2007. Vol. 10, N 2. P. 257–261.
Peirce C. S., Jastrow J. On small differences in sensation // Mem. Natl. Acad. Sci. 1885. Vol. 111. P. 73–83. 118.Ramsøy T.Z., Overgaard M. Introspection and subliminal perception // Phenomenol. Cogn. Sci. 2004. Vol. 3, N 1. P. 1–23.
Sergent C., Dehaene S. Is Consciousness a Gradual Phenomenon?: Evidence for an All-or-None Bifurcation During the Attentional Blink // Psychol. Sci. 2004. Vol. 15, N 11. P. 720–728.
Libet B., Gleason C.A., Wright E.W., Pearl D.K. Time of conscious intention to act in relation to onset of cerebral activity (readiness-potential). The unconscious initiation of a freely voluntary act // Brain. 1983. Vol. 106, pt. 3. P. 623–642.
Кулиева А.К. «Чувство контроля» в сенсомоторной деятельности у лиц с разным уровнем физической активности: выпускная квалификационная работа по спец. «клиническая психолология». СПб., 2017. 105 с. URL: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/7865 (дата обращения: 03.02.2018).
Chambon V., Haggard P. Sense of control depends on fluency of action selection, not motor performance // Cognition. Elsevier. 2012. Vol. 125, N 3. P. 441–451.
Johnson M.K., Raye C.L. Reality Monitoring // Psychol. Rev. 1981. Vol. 88, N 1. P. 67–85.
Foley M.A., Johnson M.K. Confusions between Memories for Performed and Imagined Actions: A Developmental Comparison // Child Dev. Wiley Society for Research in Child Development. 1985. Vol. 56, N 5. P. 1145.
Thompson V.A. Dual-process theories: A metacognitive perspective // In two minds: Dual processes and beyond. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2009. P. 171–196.
Gangemi A., Bourgeois-Gironde S., Mancini F. Feelings of error in reasoning — in search of a phenomenon // Think. Reason. Routledge. 2015. Vol. 21, N 4. P. 383–396.
Fischhoff B. Hindsight is not equal to foresight: The effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty // J.Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 1975. Vol. 1, N 3. P. 288–299.
Arnold M.M., Lindsay D. S. “I remember/know/guess that I knew it all along!”: Subjective experience versus objective measures of the knew-it-all-along effect // Mem. Cognit. 2007. Vol. 35, N 8. P. 1854–1868.
Kusumi T. Human metacognition and the déjà vu phenomenon // Diversity in cognition: Evolution, development, domestication, and pathology / ed. by Kazuo Fujita, Shoji Itakura. Kyoto: Kyoto University Press, 2006. P. 302–314.
Bertrand J.M.F., Martinon L.M., Souchay C., Moulin C.J.A. History repeating itself: Arnaud’s case of pathological déjà vu // Cortex. Elsevier. 2017. Vol. 87. P. 129–141.
Brown A. S. A review of the déjà vu experience // Psychol. Bull. 2003. Vol. 129, N 3. P. 394–413.
Brown A. S. The Deja Vu Experience. New York; Hove: Psychology Press, 2004. 244 p.
Neppe V.M. An Overview Perspective on what Déjà Vu is (Part 1) // J.Psychol. Clin. Psychiatry. 2015. Vol. 2, N 6. P. 001.
O’Connor A.R., Lever C., Moulin C.J.A. Novel insights into false recollection: A model of déjà vécu // Cogn. Neuropsychiatry. 2010. Vol. 15, N 1–3. P. 118–144.
Burnham W.H. Retroactive Amnesia: Illustrative Cases and a Tentative Explanation // Am. J.Psychol. University of Illinois Press. 1903. Vol. 14, N 3/4. P. 118.
Roberts R.J., Varney R.N., Hulbert J.R., Paulsen J. S., Richardson E.D., Springer J.A., Shepherd J. S., Swan C.M., Legrand J.A., Harvey J.H., Struchen M.A., Hines M.E. The neuropathology of everyday life: The frequency of partial seizure symptoms among normals // Neuropsychology. 1990. Vol. 4, N 2. P. 65–85.
Funkhouser A.T. The “dream” theory of déjà vu // Parapsychol. J. South Africa. South Africa: South African Society for Psychical Research. 1983. Vol. 4, N 2. P. 107–123.
Funkhouser A.T., Schredl M. The frequency of déjà vu (déjà rêve) and the effects of age, dream recall frequency and personality factors // Int. J.Dream Res. 2010. Vol. 3, N 1. P. 60–64.
References
James W. Psikhologiia [Psychology]. Moscow, Pedagogika Publ., 1991. 368 p. (In Russian)
Brown R., McNeill D. The “tip of the tongue” phenomenon. J.Verbal Learning Verbal Behav. Academic Press, 1966, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 325–337.
Yaniv I., Meyer D.E. Activation and metacognition of inaccessible stored information: potential bases for incubation effects in problem solving. J.Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. , 1987, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 187–205.
Metcalfe J., Schwartz B.L., Bloom P.A. The tip-of-the-tongue state and curiosity. Cogn. Res. Princ. Implic. , 2017, vol. 2, no. 1, p. 31.
Shmonina O.D., Klajman V.O., Fedorova A.I., Chetverikov A.A. “Chuvstvo na-konchike-iazyka” kak marker nalichiia dostupa k zabytomu slovu [Memory access in the tip-of-the-tongue state]. The Russian Journal of Cognitive Science, 2014, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 18–30. (In Russian)
Metcalfe J. A computational modeling approach to novelty monitoring, metacognition, and frontal lobe dysfunction. Metacognition: Knowing about knowing. Ed. J.Metcalfe, A. Shimamura. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 1994, pp. 137–156.
Mangan B. What Feeling Is the “Feeling of Knowing?”. Conscious. Cogn. Academic Press, 2000, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 538–544.
Mangan B.B. Meaning and the Structure of Consciousness: An Essay in Psycho-Aesthetics. Berkeley, University of California, 1991, 346 p.
Mangan B. Taking Phenomenology Seriously: The “Fringe” and Its Implications for Cognitive Research. Conscious. Cogn. Academic Press, 1993, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 89–108.
Skotnikova I.G. Problema uverennosti: istoriia i sovremennoe sostoianie [Confidence problem — history and state of the art]. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal [Psychological journal], 2002, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 52–60. (In Russian)
Bowden E.M. The effect of reportable and unreportable hints on anagram solution and the aha!- Experience. Conscious. Cogn. Elsevier, 1997, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 545–573.
Dorfman J., Shames V.A., Kihlstrom J.F. Intuition, incubation, and insight: implicit cognition in problem solving. Implicit Cognition. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995, pp. 257–296.
Poincaré H. Matematicheskoe tvorchestvo [Mathematical creation]. Khrestomatiia po obshhei psihologii. Psikhologiia myshleniia [Chrestomathy on general psychology. Psychology of thinking]. Ed. Y.B.Gippenrejter, V.V.Petuhov. Moscow, Moscow State University Publ., 1981, pp. 356–365. (In Russian)
Köhler W. Issledovanie intellekta chelovekopodobnykh obez’ian [The Mentality of Apes]. Osnovnye napravleniia psikhologii v klassicheskikh trudakh. Geshtal’t-psihologiia [Main directions of psychology in classical works. Gestalt psychology]. Moscow, AST-LTD, 1998, pp. 35–270. (In Russian)
Wertheimer M. Produktivnoe myshlenie [Productive thinking]. Moscow, Progress Publ., 1987, 336 p. (In Russian)
Duncker K. Kachestvennoe (eksperimental’noe i teoreticheskoe) issledovanie produktivnogo myshleniia [A Qualitative (Experimental and Theoretical) Study of Productive Thinking]. Psikhologiia myshleniia: sb. perevodov s angliiskogo i nemeckogo [Psychology of thinking: collection of translations from English and German]. Ed. A.M.Matjushkin. Moscow, Progress Publ., 1965, pp. 21–85. (In Russian)
Newell A., Shaw J.C., Simon H.A. The processes of creative thinking. Santa Monica, CA, Rand Corporation, 1958. 82 p.
MacGregor J.N., Ormerod T.C., Chronicle E.P. Information processing and insight: a process model of performance on the nine-dot and related problems. J.Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. , 2001, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 176–201.
Ellis J.J., Glaholt M.G., Reingold E.M. Eye movements reveal solution knowledge prior to insight. Conscious. Cogn. , 2011, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 768–776.
Weisberg R.W. Toward an integrated theory of insight in problem solving. Think. Reason, 2015, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 5–39.
Polanyi M. Strastnost’ nauchnogo poznaniia [Intellectual passions]. Lichnostnoe znanie [Personal knowledge]. Moscow, Progress Publ., 1985, pp. 193–247. (In Russian)
Hart J.T. Memory and the feeling-of-knowing experience. J.Educ. Psychol. , 1965, vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 208–216.
Hart J.T. Methodological note on feeling-of-knowing experiments. J.Educ. Psychol. , 1966, vol. 57, no. 6, pp. 347–349.
Adams P.A., Adams J.K. Confidence in the Recognition and Reproduction of Words Difficult to Spell. Am. J.Psychol., 1960, vol. 73, no. 4, p. 544.
Oskamp S. Overconfidence in case-study judgments. J.Consult. Psychol. American Psychological Association, 1965, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 261–265.
Flavell J.H. Metacognitive Aspects of Problem Solving. The Nature of Intelligence. Ed. L.B.Resnick. Hillsdale, NJ, Earlbaum, 1976, pp. 231–235.
Flavell J.H. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. Am. Psychol. , 1979, vol. 34, no. 10, pp. 906–911.
Hartman H.J. Developing students’ metacognitive knowledge and skills. Metacognition in learning and instruction. Dordrecht, Springer, 2001, pp. 33–68.
Pintrich P.R. The Role of Metacognitive Knowledge in Learning, Teaching, and Assessing. Theory Pract. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., 2002, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 219–225.
Harris K.R., Santangelo T., Graham S. Metacognition and strategies instruction in writing. Metacognition, Strategy Use, and Instruction. New York, The Guilford Press, 2010, pp. 226–256.
Glucksberg S., McCloskey M. Decisions about ignorance: Knowing that you don’t know. J.Exp. Psychol. Hum. Learn. Mem. , 1981, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 311–325.
Moraitou D., Efklides A. The blank in the mind questionnaire (BIMQ). Eur. J.Psychol. Assess. , 2009, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 115–122.
Lawless H., Engen T. Associations to odors: Interference, mnemonics, and verbal labeling. J.Exp. Psychol. Hum. Learn. Mem. , 1977, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 52–59.
Brown A.L. Knowing when, where, and how to remember: A problem of metacognition. Adv. Instr. Psychol. , 1978, vol. 1, pp. 225–253.
Arango-Muñoz S., Michaelian K. Epistemic feelings, epistemic emotions: Review and introduction to the focus section. Philos. Inq. , 2014, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 97–122.
Schwartz B. Sources of information in metamemory: Judgments of learning and feelings of knowing. Psychon. Bull. Rev. , 1994, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 357–375.
Koriat A. Metacognition and consciousness. The Cambridge Handbook of Consciousness. Ed. P.D.Zelazo, M.Moscovitch, E.Thompson. New York, Cambridge University Press, 2007, pp. 289–325.
Dokic J. Seeds of self-knowledge: noetic feelings and metacognition. Foundations of metacognition. Oxford, UK, Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 302–321.
Chetverikov A.A., Odajnik A. S. Modeli sub”ektivnoi otsenki effektivnosti resheniia kognitivnykh zadach: Chast’ 1. Teorii dopolnitel’noi otsenki i teorii chastichnogo dostupa [Models of subjective evaluation of performance in cognitive tasks: Part 1. Theories of additional evaluation and partial access theories]. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Series 16. Psychology. Education, 2013, no. 3, pp. 55–61. (In Russian)
Chetverikov A.A., Odajnik A. S. Modeli sub”ektivnoi otsenki effektivnosti resheniia kognitivnykh zadach: Chast’ 2. Teorii kosvennoi otsenki [The models of subjective evaluation of performance in cognitive tasks: Part 2. Inferential theories]. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Series 16. Psychology. Education, 2014, no. 1, pp. 117–125. (In Russian)
Nelson T., Narens L. Metamemory: A Theoretical Framework and New Findings. Psychol. Learn. Motiv. , 1990, vol. 26, pp. 125–173.
Nelson T.O. Consciousness and metacognition. Am. Psychol. , 1996, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 102–116.
Arango-Muñoz S. The nature of epistemic feelings. Philos. Psychol. , 2014, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 193–211.
Ackerman R., Thompson V.A. Meta-Reasoning: Monitoring and Control of Thinking and Reasoning. Trends Cogn. Sci. Elsevier Ltd., 2017, vol. 21, no. 8, pp. 607–617.
Koriat A. The Feeling of Knowing: Some Metatheoretical Implications for Consciousness and Control. Conscious. Cogn. , 2000, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 149–171.
Epstein S. Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. Am. Psychol. US: American Psychological Association, 1994, vol. 49, no. 8, p. 709
.
Evans J. S.B.T. In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends Cogn. Sci. Elsevier Current Trends, 2003, vol. 7, no. 10, pp. 454–459.
Evans J. S.B.T., Over D.E. Rationality in the selection task: Epistemic utility versus uncertainty reduction. Psychol. Rev. , 1996, vol. 103, no. 2, pp. 356–363.
Stanovich K.E., West R.F. Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate? Behav. Brain Sci. Cambridge University Press, 2000, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 645–665.
Tulving E. Organization of memory: Quo vadis? The cognitive neurosciences. Ed. M. S.Gazzaniga. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 1995, pp. 839–847.
Metcalfe J., Son L.K. Anoetic, noetic, and autonoetic metacognition. The foundations of metacognition. Ed. M.J.Beran, J.Brandl, J.Perner, J.Proust. Oxford, UK, Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 289–301.
Price M.C., Norman E. Intuitive decisions on the fringes of consciousness: Are they conscious and does it matter? Judgm. Decis. Mak. , 2008, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 28–41.
Mangan B. Sensation’s Ghost: The Non-Sensory “Fringe” of Consciousness. Psyche (Stuttg) , 2001, vol. 7, no. 18. Aviabled at: http://journalpsyche.org/files/0xaa9b.pdf (accessed: 10.02.2018).
Price M.C. Measuring the fringes of experience. Psyche, 2002, vol. 8, no. 16. Aviabled at: http:// journalpsyche.org/files/0xaaac.pdf (accessed: 10.02.2018).
Allahverdov V.M. Soznanie — kazhushheesia i real’noe [Consciousness — apparent and real]. Metodologiia i istoriia psikhologii [Methodology and history of psychology], 2009, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 137–150. (In Russian)
Allahverdov V.M. Psihika i soznanie v logike poznanija [Psychic and consciousness in the logic of cognition]. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Series 16. Psychology. Education, 2016, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 35–46. (In Russian)
Huntsinger J.R., Clore G.L. Emotion and social metacognition. Soc. metacognition, New York, Psychology Press, 2012, pp. 199–217.
Koriat A., Nussinson R., Bless H., Shaked N. Information-based and experience-based metacognitive judgments: Evidence from subjective confidence. A Handb. Mem. Metamemory, 2008, pp. 117–136.
Schwarz N. Metacognition. APA handbook of personality and social psychology, Volume 1: Attitudes and social cognition. Ed. by M.Mikulincer, P.R. Shaver. Washington, DC, US, American Psychological Association, 2015, pp. 203–229.
Tulving E. How many memory systems are there? American Psychologist, 1985, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 385–398.
Leonesio R.J., Nelson T.O. Do Different Metamemory Judgments Tap the Same Underlying Aspects of Memory? J.Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. , 1990, no. 3, pp. 464–470.
Efklides A. The Systemic Nature of Metacognitive Experiences. Metacognition. Boston, MA, Springer US, 2002, pp. 19–34.
Kihlstrom J.F., Shames V.A., Dorfman J. Intimations of memory and thought. Implicit memory and metacognition. Ed. L.M.Reder. Mahwah, New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1996, pp. 1–23.
Metcalfe J. Premonitions of Insight Predict Impending Error. J.Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. , 1986, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 623–634.
Metcalfe J., Wiebe D. Intuition in insight and noninsight problem solving. Mem. Cognit. SpringerVerlag, 1987, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 238–246.
Koriat A., Adiv S. The Self-Consistency Theory of Subjective Confidence. The Oxford handbook of metamemory. Ed. J.Dunlosky, S.Tauber. Oxford, UK, Oxford University Press, 2015, vol. 1, pp. 127–147.
Danek A.H., Fraps T., Müller A., Grothe B., Öllinger M. It’s a kind of magic-what self-reports can reveal about the phenomenology of insight problem solving. Front. Psychol. , 2014, vol. 5, p. 1408.
Dunning D., Johnson K., Ehrlinger J., Kruger J. Why people fail to recognize their own incompetence. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. , 2003, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 83–87.
Zajonc R.B. Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. , J.Pers. Soc. Psychol. , 1968, vol. 9, no. 2, pt. 2, pp. 1–27.
Koriat A. How Do We Know That We Know? The Accessibility Model of the Feeling of Knowing. Psychol. Rev. ERIC, 1993, vol. 100, no. 4, pp. 609–639.
Reder L.M., Ritter F.E. What Determines Initial Feeling of Knowing? Familiarity With Question Terms, Not With the Answer. Learn. Mem. , 1992, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 435–451.
Metcalfe J., Schwartz B.L., Joaquim S.G. The cue-familiarity heuristic in metacognition. J.Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. , 1993, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 851–861.
Whittlesea B.W.A., Williams L.D. Why do strangers feel familiar, but friends don’t? A discrepancy attribution account of feelings of familiarity. Acta Psychol. (Amst). Elsevier, 1998, vol. 98, no. 2–3, pp. 141– 165.
Whittlesea B.W., Williams L.D. The discrepancy-attribution hypothesis: I.The heuristic basis of feelings of familiarity. J.Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. , 2001, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 3–13.
Allahverdov V.M. Soznanie kak paradox [Consciousness as a paradox]. St. Petersburg, DNK, 2000. 528 p. (In Russian)
Koriat A. When Are Two Heads Better than One and Why? Science, 2012, vol. 336, no. 6079, pp. 360–362.
Reber R., Schwarz N. Effects of Perceptual Fluency on Judgments of Truth. Conscious. Cogn., 1999, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 338–342.
Reber R., Schwarz N., Winkielman P. Processing Fluency and Aesthetic Pleasure: Is Beauty in the Perceiver’s Processing Experience? Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. , 2004, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 364–382.
Topolinski S., Strack F. The architecture of intuition: Fluency and affect determine intuitive judgments of semantic and visual coherence and judgments of grammaticality in artificial grammar learning. J.Exp. Psychol. Gen. American Psychological Association, 2009, vol. 138, no. 1, p. 39.
Winkielman P., Cacioppo J.T. Mind at ease puts a smile on the face: Psychophysiological evidence that processing facilitation elicits positive affect. J.Pers. Soc. Psychol. , 2001, vol. 81, no. 6, p. 989.
Topolinski S., Bakhtiari G., Erle T.M. Can I cut the Gordian tnok? The impact of pronounceability, actual solvability, and length on intuitive problem assessments of anagrams. Cognition. Elsevier, 2016, vol. 146, pp. 439–452.
Jacoby L.L., Allan L.G., Collins J.C., Larwill A.K. Memory influences subjective experience: Noise judgments. J.Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. , 1988, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 240–247.
Kelley C.M., Rhodes M.G. Making sense and nonsense of experience: Attributions in memory and judgment. Psychol. Learn. Motiv. , 2002, vol. 41, pp. 293–320.
Novemsky N., Dhar R., Schwarz N., Simonson I. Preference fluency in choice. J.Mark. Res. American Marketing Association, 2007, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 347–356.
Eldridge L.L., Knowlton B.J., Furmanski C. S. Remembering episodes: a selective role for the hippocampus during retrieval. Nat. Neurosci, 2000, vol. 3, no. 11, pp. 1149–1152.
Eldridge L.L. A Dissociation of Encoding and Retrieval Processes in the Human Hippocampus. J. Neurosci, 2005, vol. 25, no. 13, pp. 3280–3286.
Rubin D.C., Schrauf R.W., Gulgoz S., Naka M. Cross-cultural variability of component processes in autobiographical remembering: Japan, Turkey, and the USA. Memory. Taylor & Francis, 2007, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 536–547.
Golovina E.V., Skotnikova I.G., Jelliot M.A. Fenomen uverennosti i ego proiavleniia v russkoi i nemetskoi kul’turakh [The Phenomenon of Confidence as Manifested in the Russian and German Cultures]. Experimental psychology (Russia) , 2009, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 23–34. (In Russian)
Eremenko V.I. Vospominanie i znanie kak formy perezhivaniia proshlogo: avtoref. dis. kand. psihol. nauk [Recall and knowledge as a form of past experience (abstract of the dissertation of the candidate of science) ]. Moscow, 2007. 26 p. (In Russian)
Titchener E.B. Memory and imagination. A Text-book of Psychology. New York, The Macmillan Company, 1928, pp. 396–426.
Kinoshita S. Feeling of Familiarity. Metacognition: Process, Function and Use. Ed. P.Chambres, M.Izaute, P.-J.Marescaux. Boston, MA, Springer US, 2002, pp. 79–90.
Tulving E. Memory and consciousness. Can. Psychol. Can. , 1985, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 1–12.
Kinoshita S. Masked target priming effects on feeling-of-knowing and feeling-of-familiarity judgments. Acta Psychol. (Amst) , 1997, vol. 97, no. 2, pp. 183–199.
Mandler G. Recognizing: The Judgment of Previous Occurrence. Psychol. Rev. , 1980, vol. 81, no. 3, pp. 211–252.
Miner A.C., Reder L.M. A new look at feeling of knowing: Its metacognitive role in regulating question answering. Metacognition: Knowing about knowing. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 1994, pp. 47–70.
Koriat A., Lieblich I. What does a person in a “TOT” state know that a person in a “don’t know” state doesn’t know. Mem. Cognit. Springer-Verlag, 1974, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 647–655.
Windschitl P.D., Wells G.L. Measuring psychological uncertainty: Verbal versus numeric methods. J.Exp. Psychol. Appl. American Psychological Association, 1996, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 343–364.
Jonsson F.U., Olsson M.J. Olfactory metacognition. Chem. Senses. Oxford University Press, 2003, vol. 28, no. 7, pp. 651–658.
Efklides A., Touroutoglou A. Prospective Memory Failure and the Metacognitive Experience of “Blank in the Mind”. Trends and prospects in metacognition research. New York, Springer, 2010, pp. 105–126.
Jönsson F.U., Lindström B.R. Using a multidimensional scaling approach to investigate the underlying basis of ease of learning judgments. Scand. J.Psychol. , 2010, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 103–108.
Arbuckle T.Y., Cuddy L.L. Discrimination of item strength at time of presentation. J.Exp. Psychol. , 1969, vol. 81, no. 1, pp. 126–131.
Koriat A. Monitoring one’s own knowledge during study: A cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning. J.Exp. Psychol. Gen. , 1997, vol. 126, no. 4, pp. 349–370.
Dunlosky J., Serra M.J., Matvey G., Rawson K.A. Second-Order Judgments About Judgments of Learning. J.Gen. Psychol. , 2005, vol. 132, no. 4, pp. 335–346.
Bjork R.A. Assessing our own competence: Heuristics and illusions. Attention and performance. Attention and performance XVII: Cognitive regulation of performance: Interaction of theory and application. Cambridge, MA, US, The MIT Press, 1999, pp. 435–459.
Koriat A., Bjork R.A. Illusions of competence in monitoring one’s knowledge during study. J.Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. , 2005, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 187–194.
Ehrlinger J., Dunning D. How Chronic Self-views Influence (and Potentially Mislead) Estimates of Performance. J.Pers. Soc. Psychol. , 2003, vol. 84, no. 1, pp. 5–17.
Payne S.J., Duggan G.B. Giving up problem solving. Mem. Cognit. Springer-Verlag, 2011, vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 902–913.
Touroutoglou A., Efklides A. Cognitive Interruption as an Object of Metacognitive Monitoring: Feeling of Difficulty and Surprise. Trends and Prospects in Metacognition Research. Boston, MA, Springer US, 2010, pp. 171–208.
Dewey J. How We Think. Boston, New York, Chicago, D.C.Health & Co. Publishers, 1910. 228 p.
Efklides A., Samara A., Petropoulou M. Feeling of difficulty: An aspect of monitoring that influences control. Eur. J.Psychol. Educ. Springer Netherlands, 1999, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 461–476.
Wierzchoń M., Asanowicz D., Paulewicz B., Cleeremans A. Subjective measures of consciousness in artificial grammar learning task. Conscious. Cogn. , 2012, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 1141–1153.
Spiridonov V.F. Realen li insait? [Whether insight is real?]. Teoreticheskie i prikladnye problemy psikhologii myshleniia. Trudy III konferentsii molodykh uchenykh pamiati K.Dunkera [Theoretical and applied problems of the psychology of thinking. Proceedings of the Third Conference of Young Scientists in memory of K.Dunker]. Moscow, RGGU Publ., 2012, pp. 42–50. (In Russian)
Medyncev A.A. Vliianie irrelevantnoi informatsii na process razgadyvaniia anagramm [The influence of irrelevant information on anagram-solving process]. SISP, 2012, no. 11, p. 37. Aviabled at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/vliyanie-irrelevantnoy-informatsii-na-protsess-razgadyvaniya-anagramm (accessed: 10.02.2018). (In Russian)
Vladimirov I.Y., Markina P.N. Ob”ektivnyi i sub”ektivnyi tupik v protsesse insaitnogo resheniia. Vestnik of Yaroslavl Demidov State University. Series the Humanities, 2017, vol. 3, no. 41, pp. 76–80. (In Russian)
Koriat A. Subjective confidence in perceptual judgments: A test of the self-consistency model. J.Exp. Psychol. Gen. , 2011, vol. 140, no. 1, pp. 117–139.
Persaud N., McLeod P., Cowey A. Post-decision wagering objectively measures awareness. Nat. Neurosci. , 2007, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 257–261.
Peirce C. S., Jastrow J. On small differences in sensation. Mem. Natl. Acad. Sci. , 1885, vol. 111, pp. 73–83.
Ramsøy T.Z., Overgaard M. Introspection and subliminal perception. Phenomenol. Cogn. Sci. , 2004, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–23.
Sergent C., Dehaene S. Is Consciousness a Gradual Phenomenon?: Evidence for an All-or-None Bifurcation During the Attentional Blink. Psychol. Sci. , 2004, vol. 15, no. 11, pp. 720–728.
Libet B., Gleason C.A., Wright E.W., Pearl D.K. Time of conscious intention to act in relation to onset of cerebral activity (readiness-potential). The unconscious initiation of a freely voluntary act. Brain, 1983, vol. 106, pt. 3, pp. 623–642.
Kulieva A.K. “Chuvstvo kontrolia” v sensomotornoi deiatel’nosti u lits s raznym urovnem fizicheskoi aktivnosti: vypusknaia kvalifikatsionnaia rabota po spec. “klinicheskaia psikholologiia” [Sense of agency in sensorimotor tasks measured in people with different level of physical activity (undergraduate thesis) ]. St. Petersburg, 2017. 105 p. Aviabled at: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/7865 (accessed: 03.02.2018). (In Russian)
Chambon V., Haggard P. Sense of control depends on fluency of action selection, not motor performance. Cognition. Elsevier, 2012, vol. 125, no. 3, pp. 441–451.
Johnson M.K., Raye C.L. Reality Monitoring. Psychol. Rev. , 1981, vol. 88, no. 1, pp. 67–85.
Foley M.A., Johnson M.K. Confusions between Memories for Performed and Imagined Actions: A Developmental Comparison. Child Dev. Wiley Society for Research in Child Development, 1985, vol. 56, no. 5, p. 1145.
Thompson V.A. Dual-process theories: A metacognitive perspective. In two minds: Dual processes and beyond. Oxford, UK, Oxford University Press, 2009, pp. 171–196.
Gangemi A., Bourgeois-Gironde S., Mancini F. Feelings of error in reasoning — in search of a phenomenon. Think. Reason. Routledge, 2015, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 383–396.
Fischhoff B. Hindsight is not equal to foresight: The effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty. J.Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. , 1975, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 288–299.
Arnold M.M., Lindsay D. S. “I remember/know/guess that I knew it all along!”: Subjective experience versus objective measures of the knew-it-all-along effect. Mem. Cognit. Springer-Verlag, 2007, vol. 35, no. 8, pp. 1854–1868.
Kusumi T. Human metacognition and the déjà vu phenomenon. Diversity in cognition: Evolution, development, domestication, and pathology. Ed. by Kazuo Fujita, Shoji Itakura. Kyoto, Kyoto University Press, 2006, pp. 302–314.
Bertrand J.M.F., Martinon L.M., Souchay C., Moulin C.J.A. History repeating itself: Arnaud’s case of pathological déjà vu. Cortex. Elsevier., 2017, vol. 87, pp. 129–141.
Brown A. S. A review of the déjà vu experience. Psychol. Bull, 2003, vol. 129, no. 3, pp. 394–413.
Brown A. S. The Deja Vu Experience. New York, Hove, Psychology Press, 2004. 244 p.
Neppe V.M. An Overview Perspective on what Déjà Vu is (Part 1). J.Psychol. Clin. Psychiatry, 2015, vol. 2, no. 6, p. 00111.
O’Connor A.R., Lever C., Moulin C.J.A. Novel insights into false recollection: A model of déjà vécu. Cogn. Neuropsychiatry, 2010, vol. 15, no. 1–3, pp. 118–144.
Burnham W.H. Retroactive Amnesia: Illustrative Cases and a Tentative Explanation. Am. J.Psychol. University of Illinois Press, 1903, vol. 14, no. 3/4, p. 118.
Roberts R.J., Varney R.N., Hulbert J.R., Paulsen J. S., Richardson E.D., Springer J.A., Shepherd J. S., Swan C.M., Legrand J.A., Harvey J.H., Struchen M.A., Hines M.E. The neuropathology of everyday life: The frequency of partial seizure symptoms among normals. Neuropsychology, 1990, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 65–85.
Funkhouser A.T. The “dream” theory of déjà vu. Parapsychol. J. South Africa . South Africa: South African Society for Psychical Research, 1983, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 107–123.
Funkhouser A.T., Schredl M. The frequency of déjà vu (déjà rêve) and the effects of age, dream recall frequency and personality factors. Int. J.Dream Res. , 2010, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 60–64
Downloads
Published
2018-08-31
How to Cite
Тихонов, Р. В., Аммалайнен, А. В., & Морошкина, Н. В. (2018). The variety of metacognitive feelings: Different phenomena or different terms?. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Psychology, 8(3), 214–242. https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu16.2018.302
Issue
Section
Theory and Methodology of Psychology
License
Articles of "Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Psychology" are open access distributed under the terms of the License Agreement with Saint Petersburg State University, which permits to the authors unrestricted distribution and self-archiving free of charge.
