Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2012 Aug 5;367(1599):2213-23.
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2012.0123.

The role of metacognition in human social interactions

Affiliations
Review

The role of metacognition in human social interactions

Chris D Frith. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. .

Abstract

Metacognition concerns the processes by which we monitor and control our own cognitive processes. It can also be applied to others, in which case it is known as mentalizing. Both kinds of metacognition have implicit and explicit forms, where implicit means automatic and without awareness. Implicit metacognition enables us to adopt a we-mode, through which we automatically take account of the knowledge and intentions of others. Adoption of this mode enhances joint action. Explicit metacognition enables us to reflect on and justify our behaviour to others. However, access to the underlying processes is very limited for both self and others and our reports on our own and others' intentions can be very inaccurate. On the other hand, recent experiments have shown that, through discussions of our perceptual experiences with others, we can detect sensory signals more accurately, even in the absence of objective feedback. Through our willingness to discuss with others the reasons for our actions and perceptions, we overcome our lack of direct access to the underlying cognitive processes. This creates the potential for us to build more accurate accounts of the world and of ourselves. I suggest, therefore, that explicit metacognition is a uniquely human ability that has evolved through its enhancement of collaborative decision-making.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Flavell J. H. 1979. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. Am. Psychol. 34, 906–911 10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906 (doi:10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906) - DOI - DOI
    1. Koriat A. 2007. Metacognition and consciousness. In Cambridge handbook of consciousness (eds Zelazo P. D., Moscovitch M., Thompson E.), pp. 289–325 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
    1. Fleming S. M., Dolan R. J., Frith C. D. 2012. Metacognition: computation, biology and function. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 367, 1280–1286 10.1098/rstb.2012.0021 (doi:10.1098/rstb.2012.0021) - DOI - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Yeung N., Summerfield C. 2012. Metacognition in human decision making: confidence and error monitoring. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B. 367, 1310–1321 10.1098/rstb.2012.0416 (doi:10.1098/rstb.2012.0416) - DOI - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Logan G. D., Crump M. J. 2010. Cognitive illusions of authorship reveal hierarchical error detection in skilled typists. Science 330, 683–686 10.1126/science.1190483 (doi:10.1126/science.1190483) - DOI - DOI - PubMed