Different routes to metacognitive judgments: The role of accuracy motivation

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The current research proposes that metacognitive difficulty affects product evaluation through two different routes-the feelings of ease-of-retrieval heuristic and the self-validation process. The findings across four laboratory experiments show that metacognitive difficulty can undermine product evaluation through the feelings of ease-of-retrieval heuristic among low-accuracy individuals, regardless of a perceived fit between expected and experienced difficulty. In contrast, the findings indicate that metacognitive difficulty can enhance (vs. undermine) product evaluation among high-accuracy individuals through the self-validation process when there is a perceived fit (vs. misfit) between expected and experienced difficulty. We suggest that individuals under high accuracy motivation are more likely than those under low accuracy motivation to draw less determined and more flexible interpretation of metacognitive difficulty in making their product evaluation.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)307-319
Number of pages13
JournalJournal of Consumer Psychology
Volume24
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014 Jul

Fingerprint

Motivation
Emotions
Product evaluation
Research
Heuristics
Perceived fit

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Applied Psychology
  • Marketing

Cite this

@article{2724ffc586d549f59a842cc60bd3c941,
title = "Different routes to metacognitive judgments: The role of accuracy motivation",
abstract = "The current research proposes that metacognitive difficulty affects product evaluation through two different routes-the feelings of ease-of-retrieval heuristic and the self-validation process. The findings across four laboratory experiments show that metacognitive difficulty can undermine product evaluation through the feelings of ease-of-retrieval heuristic among low-accuracy individuals, regardless of a perceived fit between expected and experienced difficulty. In contrast, the findings indicate that metacognitive difficulty can enhance (vs. undermine) product evaluation among high-accuracy individuals through the self-validation process when there is a perceived fit (vs. misfit) between expected and experienced difficulty. We suggest that individuals under high accuracy motivation are more likely than those under low accuracy motivation to draw less determined and more flexible interpretation of metacognitive difficulty in making their product evaluation.",
author = "Park, {Se Bum} and Bae, {Sung Joo}",
year = "2014",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1016/j.jcps.2013.09.002",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "307--319",
journal = "Journal of Consumer Psychology",
issn = "1057-7408",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "3",

}

Different routes to metacognitive judgments : The role of accuracy motivation. / Park, Se Bum; Bae, Sung Joo.

In: Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 24, No. 3, 07.2014, p. 307-319.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Different routes to metacognitive judgments

T2 - The role of accuracy motivation

AU - Park, Se Bum

AU - Bae, Sung Joo

PY - 2014/7

Y1 - 2014/7

N2 - The current research proposes that metacognitive difficulty affects product evaluation through two different routes-the feelings of ease-of-retrieval heuristic and the self-validation process. The findings across four laboratory experiments show that metacognitive difficulty can undermine product evaluation through the feelings of ease-of-retrieval heuristic among low-accuracy individuals, regardless of a perceived fit between expected and experienced difficulty. In contrast, the findings indicate that metacognitive difficulty can enhance (vs. undermine) product evaluation among high-accuracy individuals through the self-validation process when there is a perceived fit (vs. misfit) between expected and experienced difficulty. We suggest that individuals under high accuracy motivation are more likely than those under low accuracy motivation to draw less determined and more flexible interpretation of metacognitive difficulty in making their product evaluation.

AB - The current research proposes that metacognitive difficulty affects product evaluation through two different routes-the feelings of ease-of-retrieval heuristic and the self-validation process. The findings across four laboratory experiments show that metacognitive difficulty can undermine product evaluation through the feelings of ease-of-retrieval heuristic among low-accuracy individuals, regardless of a perceived fit between expected and experienced difficulty. In contrast, the findings indicate that metacognitive difficulty can enhance (vs. undermine) product evaluation among high-accuracy individuals through the self-validation process when there is a perceived fit (vs. misfit) between expected and experienced difficulty. We suggest that individuals under high accuracy motivation are more likely than those under low accuracy motivation to draw less determined and more flexible interpretation of metacognitive difficulty in making their product evaluation.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84903149395&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84903149395&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jcps.2013.09.002

DO - 10.1016/j.jcps.2013.09.002

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84903149395

VL - 24

SP - 307

EP - 319

JO - Journal of Consumer Psychology

JF - Journal of Consumer Psychology

SN - 1057-7408

IS - 3

ER -