The interplay of metacognitive awareness and positive self-view: methodological reflections

Research on self-judgment often interprets findings through the lens of the self-serving bias (SSB), yet far less attention has been paid to the methodological features that shape how self-judgment is elicited, quantified, and interpreted. This dissertation addresses this gap by systematically examining how design parameters of the trait judgment task influence the cognitive processes and observable outcomes of self-evaluation. Across three experimental studies, key methodological factors were isolated and tested. Study 1 adapted the mental rotation paradigm to operationalize and measure the cognitive effort involved in perspective-taking, demonstrating that reaction times vary systematically with perspective shift complexity. Study 2 manipulated response scale format, revealing that binary versus multi-point scales alter the distribution and extremity of trait endorsements, indicating scale design can systematically bias responses. Study 3 varied presentation time to explore time pressure effects, showing that response deadlines influence decision dynamics without necessarily altering judgment valence. Together, these findings illustrate that methodological variables—such as perspective manipulation, response format, and timing parameters—are not neutral procedural choices but active determinants of how self-judgment processes manifest in experimental data. This work reframes the trait judgment task as a tool whose configuration critically shapes both the cognitive demands placed on participants and the interpretability of self-evaluation measures.