All other things being equal, what makes us pause and reflect on some choices but not others? Once reflection has been engaged, how do we decide that we have given the current matter sufficient thought? In this talk, I will use a metacognitive lens to shed light on these issues. Like other models of metacognition (e.g., Nelson & Narens, 1991), the Meta-Reasoning framework (Ackerman & Thompson, 2017) proposes that reasoning, decision-making, and problem-solving behaviours can be understood at both the meta- and the object-level. Processes at the "meta" level are proposed to monitor the quality of our thinking and to trigger control processes as needed. The monitoring processes that I will discuss consist of noetic feelings of certainty or uncertainty, which are measured by asking participants how they feel about a decision they are about to make, are in the process of making, or have made. Monitoring processes inform control processes, which include continuing to think about a problem, changing one's answer, giving up, changing strategies, amongst other behaviours. Perhaps not surprisingly, the data show that it is difficult for people to engage in analytic processes; counter-intuitively, however, the data also show that they are often reluctant to give up when it is appropriate to do so.