New research published in Nature Communications and conducted by investigators at the University of California, Davis (UC Davis), tracked the eye movements of 2-year-olds during certain tasks to determine their memory accuracy (metamemory) and confidence 1 year later.
Sounds fascinating … start with this metamemory component.
Generally speaking, “metamemory” refers to the metacognition (mental awareness) and knowledge of humans’ own memory capabilities—a form of memory “self-monitoring” critical for basic learning and decision-making.
- In other words: This is the ability to judge how well a memory reflects reality.
Give me a real-world example of this.
Researchers gave the scenario of a student not feeling prepared for an upcoming test and choosing to ask their teacher for assistance in prepping for it.
- How metamemory comes into play: The student recognized their lack of confidence in remembering course material previously taught to them.
Got it. So how early does metacognition develop?
A few studies have indicated potential early signs of metacognition among infants and toddlers.
For instance: This mental awareness—which includes the capacity to form “durable memories that can be reinstated from multiple cues”—has been more prominently demonstrated in children as young as preschool-aged (around 3 to 5 years old), improving among elementary school-aged children and older.
Go on …
While multiple hypotheses have been proposed, the investigators noted that research has not traditionally evaluated “how young children gain awareness of their memory states in order to regulate their decisions.”
Even further: Specific behaviors associated with metacognition among this younger age group have not yet been confirmed—and the origins of this development are still unknown.
Now tie this back to the focus of the new research.
Prior research on 2-year-olds has demonstrated the difficulty of memory-based decisions and using memory signals to guide their response selections.
- However: It also indicated the positive impact visual comparisons can have on their overall accuracy.
Sticking with this idea: Investigators suggested that gaze transitions (eye movements) and response latencies (the length of time it takes to respond on a memory task) may signal early assessments of memory accuracy, “leading to the possibility that these early behavioral responses may be precursors of metamemory monitoring.”
- As such: Examining the eye movements of toddlers was proposed as a way to learn more about their overall metamemory.
How was this done?
The researchers conducted a longitudinal study on 176 toddlers (using data based on 148) to determine how their individual differences in eye movements between response options and latencies predicted their metamemory monitoring abilities.
And the setup?
Each 2-year-old was presented with pairs of images (one old and one new) and asked to pick which image they thought they had been shown already.
- To note: Each toddler completed two parallel versions of the task at both timepoints:
- One task administered on an eye tracker (to collect precise eye-movement data)
- One task administered on a touchscreen monitor (to collect precise response latencies)
Fast forward 1 year: The now-3-year-olds completed the same tasks—however, they were also asked how confident they were in their selection.
What was measured during these tasks?
The toddlers were measured with subjective assessments of their memory confidence 1 year later.
- Measured variables included:
- Accuracy
- Confidence rating
- Gaze switches (between target and distractor images)
- Response latencies
- Age in months
- Theory of mind (understanding of mental states in oneself and how they change)
- Mental state language (how often a toddler used the phrase “I don’t know”)
And the findings?
The study authors determined the results were consistent with their main hypothesis—that early eye monitoring could predict better metamemory monitoring.
And when testing out alternative models involving both monitoring versions of the tasks (eye tracking and touchscreen), both models underscored the critical importance of relying on a “memory response and visual exploration.”
- At Time 1 (involving 2-year-olds): Memory accuracy was not significantly different from chance across the entire sample for both versions of the task.
- At Time 2 (involving 3-year-olds): Memory accuracy scores were similar for each version of the task and above chance in both versions as well.
In general: There was substantial individual variation in metamemory monitoring, enabling investigators to identify the "longitudinal emergence” of when children begin to demonstrate this capability.
- See here for more data.
Give it to me more plainly.
Researchers reported that the number of times the toddlers looked at both images—as well as how often they got the correct answer at age 2—predicted their ability to accurately judge what they remembered at age 3.
What this translates to: Toddlers more inclined to compare their options before selecting one may have had more practice in thinking of what they remembered (using their memory), leading to them being better able to recognize when they remembered accurately and inaccurately.
- Coupled with this, participants also reported more confidence when correct and uncertain when incorrect.
Any surprising results?
One key finding: Toddlers’ awareness of mental states—both their own and others’—plus the language to describe them, “had no connection to being able to judge memories at 3 years old.”
In speaking on this, first author Sarah Leckey, PhD, noted that, while having a theory of mind and the language to describe mental states may not be essential for the initial emergence of metamemory monitoring, “These abilities may become more relevant later in childhood, when metamemory becomes more sophisticated.”