Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42749867›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Neuroscience2026

Towards an integrative neuroscience of metacognition.

Stephen M Fleming

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Neuroscience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Stephen M FlemingDepartment of Experimental Psychology and Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, London, UK. stephen.fleming@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0233-4891

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Metacognition enables organisms to self-evaluate their own cognitive processes. In humans, this capacity underpins adaptive learning, social coordination and the formation of self-beliefs about skill and ability. A core motif that underpins multiple forms of metacognition is the ability to form estimates of performance in a self-directed frame of reference, expressed as propositional confidence about one's own behaviour and mental processes. Convergent behavioural, computational and neural evidence obtained across rodents, non-human primates and humans indicates that these self-evaluations arise from structured transformations of uncertainty. Dynamic evidence accumulation processes provide candidate building blocks for local confidence, whereas multimodal prefrontal brain areas integrate these signals to support abstract, global self-beliefs. This architecture supports metacognitive control at multiple timescales, from rapid error correction to strategic task arbitration and social communication. Dysfunctional metacognition can lead to disorders of reality monitoring and insight, in which erroneous mental representations are endorsed with aberrant confidence. By integrating computational, cross-species and clinical perspectives, metacognitive neuroscience offers a bridge from neural circuit mechanisms to subjective experience.

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.