Objectives Cognitive and metacognitive deficits depict important factors in depression, but the relationship between these concepts remains to be elucidated. The present study investigated the difference between patients with depression and controls in metacognitive judgements regarding the domain of attention. Furthermore, the associations between different metacognitive abilities, depressiveness and confidence were investigated, as well as in how far the derived correlates would predict depression. Methods Thirty patients with a major depressive episode and 30 healthy participants were enrolled in the current study. Attention and executive functioning ability were assessed including metacognitive judgements of performance and confidence with regard to the test performance in the Stroop test. To examine further aspects related to (meta-)cognitive abilities, decentering skills, aspects of self-conscious attention, self-assessed intelligence and metacognitive beliefs, judgements and monitoring tendencies were assessed. Results Albeit groups’ metacognitive judgements of performance did not differ, patients indicated to be significantly less confident in their judgements. Depressive patients showed less decentering abilities compared to healthy participants and there was a significant association between decentering and confidence ratings. Moreover, depressiveness was associated with dysfunctional self-consciousness and low cognitive confidence. Finally, lower decentering skills and higher dysfunctional self-attention were the best predictors for depressiveness. Conclusions Results favor the assumption that patients’ metacognitive abilities regarding the domain of attention are not generally deficient. Rather, the lower confidence in their judgements and dysfunctional (meta-)cognitive abilities, like decentering, metacognitive beliefs and aspects of self-conscious attention and intelligence, seem to mirror the patients’ impairments.

In the area of metacognition research, different methods have been used to study participants’ subjective sense of confidence in their choices. Among the most often used methods are explicit reports of subjective confidence, post-decision wagering and measuring additional info-seeking behavior. While all three methods are thought to measure confidence, they differ greatly in terms of practical execution and theoretical foundation. The method of reverse correlation has previously been used to determine which aspects of the stimulus influence decisions and confidence judgments. Here we compare the three methods of confidence assessment using reverse correlation analysis. Explicit reports and post-decision wagering revealed a positive association of stimulus information with choices and reduced decision weights for low-confidence trials. When confidence was assessed using the info-seeking method, low-confidence trials showed an inverted association with primary stimulus information. Using modelling of the behavioral data, we show how the reverse correlation results of all three methods can be explained by a simple model of confidence when internal error-corrections are allowed during seeking of additional information.

A central experimental task in executive control research is the Stop-signal task, which allows measuring the ability to inhibit dominant responses. A crucial aspect of this task consists of varying the delay between the Go- and Stop-signal. Since the time necessary to administer the task can be long, a method of optimal delay choice was recently proposed: the PSI method. In a behavioral experiment, we show a variant of this method, the PSI marginal method, to be unable to deal with the Go-response slowing often observed in the Stop-signal task. We propose the PSI adjusted method, which is able to deal with this response slowing by correcting the estimation process for the current reaction time. In several sets of behavioral simulations, as well as another behavioral experiment, we document and compare the statistical properties of the PSI marginal method, our PSI adjusted method, and the traditional staircase method, both when reaction times are constant and when they are linearly increasing. The results show the PSI adjusted method’s performance to be comparable to the PSI marginal method in the case of constant Go-response times, and to outperform the PSI marginal method as well as the staircase methods when there is response slowing. The PSI adjusted method thus offers the possibility of efficient estimation of Stop-signal reaction times in the face of response slowing.