Editing Metacognition (section)

=== In nonhuman primates ===

==== Chimpanzees ====
Beran, Smith, and Perdue (2013) found that chimpanzees showed metacognitive monitoring in the information-seeking task.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Beran|first1=Michael J.|last2=Smith|first2=J. David|last3=Perdue|first3=Bonnie M.|date=2013-03-18|title=Language-Trained Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) Name What They Have Seen but Look First at What They Have Not Seen|url= |journal=Psychological Science|volume=24|issue=5|pages=660–666|language=en|doi=10.1177/0956797612458936|pmc=3902479|pmid=23508741}}</ref> In their studies, three language-trained chimpanzees were asked to use the keyboard to name the food item in order to get the food. The food in the container was either visible to them or they had to move toward the container to see its contents. Studies shown that chimpanzees more often checked what was in the container first if the food in the container was hidden. But when the food was visible to them, the chimpanzees were more likely to directly approach the keyboard and reported the identity of the food without looking again in the container. Their results suggested that chimpanzees know what they have seen and show effective information-seeking behavior when information is incomplete.

==== Rhesus macaques (''Macaca mulatta'') ====
Morgan et al. (2014) investigated whether rhesus macaques can make both retrospective and prospective metacognitive judgments on the same memory task.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Morgan|first1=Gin|last2=Kornell|first2=Nate|last3=Kornblum|first3=Tamar|last4=Terrace|first4=Herbert S.|date=March 2014|title=Retrospective and prospective metacognitive judgments in rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta)|url= |journal=Animal Cognition|language=en|volume=17|issue=2|pages=249–257|doi=10.1007/s10071-013-0657-4|issn=1435-9448|pmc=3883882|pmid=23812677}}</ref> Risk choices were introduced to assess the monkey's confidence about their memories. Two male rhesus monkeys (''Macaca mulatta'') were trained in a computerized token economy task first in which they can accumulate tokens to exchange food rewards. Monkeys were presented with multiple images of common objects simultaneously and then a moving border appearing on the screen indicating the target. Immediately following the presentation, the target images and some distractors were shown in the test. During the training phase, monkeys received immediate feedback after they made responses. They can earn two tokens if they make correct choices but lost two tokens if they were wrong.

In Experiment 1, the confidence rating was introduced after they completed their responses in order to test the retrospective metamemory judgments. After each response, a high-risk and a low-risk choice were provided to the monkeys. They could earn one token regardless of their accuracy if they choose the low-risk option. When they chose high-risk, they were rewarded with three tokens if their memory response was correct on that trial but lost three tokens if they made incorrect responses. Morgan and colleagues (2014) found a significant positive correlation between memory accuracy and risk choice in two rhesus monkeys. That is, they were more likely to select the high-risk option if they answered correctly in the working memory task but select the low-risk option if they were failed in the memory task.

Then Morgan et al. (2014) examine monkeys’ prospective metacognitive monitoring skills in Experiment 2. This study employed the same design except that two monkeys were asked to make low-risk or high-risk confidence judgment before they make actual responses to measure their judgments about future events. Similarly, the monkeys were more often to choose high-risk confidence judgment before answering correctly in working memory task and tended to choose the low-risk option before providing an incorrect response. These two studies indicated that rhesus monkeys can accurately monitor their performance and provided evidence of metacognitive abilities in monkeys.