Different routes to metacognitive judgments: The role of accuracy motivation

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

8 Citations (Scopus)


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
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - 2014 Jul

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Applied Psychology
  • Marketing


Dive into the research topics of 'Different routes to metacognitive judgments: The role of accuracy motivation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this