1. Lipko, Dunlosky, &
Merriman (in press)
Persistent overconfidence despite practice

2. 3 experiments with
preschoolers
• evaluated whether persistent
overconfidence occurs when preschoolers
have an opportunity to study a list of to be
recalled items prior to predicting their
performance

3. Experiment 1
• On 3 trials children saw 10 pictures
presented one at a time and placed on a
magnetic board
• Once all 10 pictures were presented, child
had 10 s to study the pictures
• Then asked, “how many pictures do you
think you can remember?”
• Pictures were then covered and the
children were given 60 s to recall as many
as possible.

4. 9
Prediction Recall
6.75
4.5
2.25
0
Trial 1 Trial2 Trail 3

5. Experiment 2
• 2 (prediction: self or other) X 2 (order: self
first or second) X 2 (model: male or
female)
• and 5 trials instead of 3
• Do more trials increase calibration?
• Is it wishful thinking?

6. Self Prediction
Self Recall
7
5.25
Other Prediction
Other Recall
3.5
7
1.75
5.25
0
Trial 1 Trail 2 Trail 3 Trial 4 Trial 5 3.5
1.75
0
Trial 1 Trail 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Trial 5

7. Experiment 3
• Just like the self-condition only in Exp 2
• Postdiction and control
• Will the children calibrate better if there is
salient information? In other words, if recall
accuracy on last trial is in WM, will they
calibrate more accurately?

8. Control Prediction
Control Recall
9
6.75
4.5
2.25
0
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Trail 5

9. Prediction Recall
Postdiciton
9
6.75
4.5
2.25
0
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trail 4 Trail 5

10. Table 2
Mean prediction, recall, and postdiction values in Experiments 1, 2, and 3
Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3 Trial 4 Trial 5
Experiment 1
–a
Prediction 8.33 (2.37) 8.29 (2.22) 7.05 (2.73) –ª
Recall 5.52 (1.60) 3.76 (1.34) 3.52 (1.50) – –
Experiment 2
Self condition
Prediction 6.75 (2.68) 6.25 (2.54) 6.34 (2.91) 6.16 (3.06) 5.44 (2.72)
Recall 4.06 (1.64) 2.59 (1.32) 2.59 (1.36) 2.44 (1.48) 2.37 (1.38)
Other condition
Prediction 6.62 (3.27) 5.69 (2.66) 5.97 (2.47) 5.66 (2.94) 5.56 (2.83)
Recallb 4.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 3.00
Experiment 3
Control group
Prediction 8.90 (2.26) 7.71 (3.05) 7.03 (2.83) 7.19 (3.05) 7.22 (2.81)
Recall 4.97 (1.45) 3.32 (1.60) 3.22 (1.36) 3.00 (1.09) 3.19 (1.78)
Postdiction group
Prediction 8.73 (2.45) 7.87 (2.70) 7.12 (3.21) 7.45 (3.09) 7.18 (3.44)
Recall 4.90 (1.66) 3.67 (1.38) 3.24 (1.41) 2.97 (1.16) 3.06 (2.56)
–c 5.90 (2.26) 4.61 (2.29) 3.87 (1.90) 3.76 (2.15)
Postdiction
Note. Standard deviations are in parentheses.
a
Only three trials occurred in Experiment 1.
b
Values represent the predetermined recall of the child model in the video.
c
Postdictions were not collected on the first trial.
Concerning the main effect of trial, both prediction and recall values declined across the three tri-
als. Predictions on the first trial were significantly greater than those on the third trial, t(20) = 2.26,
p < .05, d = .50. The mean prediction on the second trial was also significantly different from that on