دورية أكاديمية
Knowing that you know that you know? An extreme-confidence heuristic can lead to above-chance discrimination of metacognitive performance.
| العنوان: | Knowing that you know that you know? An extreme-confidence heuristic can lead to above-chance discrimination of metacognitive performance. |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Sherman MT; Sussex Centre for Consciousness Science, University of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9QJ, United Kingdom.; Department of Informatics, University of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9QJ, United Kingdom., Seth AK; Sussex Centre for Consciousness Science, University of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9QJ, United Kingdom.; Department of Informatics, University of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9QJ, United Kingdom.; Canadian Institute for Advanced Research, Program on Brain, Mind and Consciousness, Toronto M5G 1M1, Canada. |
| المصدر: | Neuroscience of consciousness [Neurosci Conscious] 2024 May 22; Vol. 2024 (1), pp. niae020. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 May 22 (Print Publication: 2024). |
| نوع المنشور: | Journal Article |
| اللغة: | English |
| بيانات الدورية: | Publisher: Oxford University Press Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 101679109 Publication Model: eCollection Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 2057-2107 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 20572107 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Neurosci Conscious Subsets: PubMed not MEDLINE |
| أسماء مطبوعة: | Original Publication: [Oxford] : Oxford University Press, [2015]- |
| مستخلص: | In daily life, we can not only estimate confidence in our inferences ('I'm sure I failed that exam'), but can also estimate whether those feelings of confidence are good predictors of decision accuracy ('I feel sure I failed, but my feeling is probably wrong; I probably passed'). In the lab, by using simple perceptual tasks and collecting trial-by-trial confidence ratings visual metacognition research has repeatedly shown that participants can successfully predict the accuracy of their perceptual choices. Can participants also successfully evaluate 'confidence in confidence' in these tasks? This is the question addressed in this study. Participants performed a simple, two-interval forced choice numerosity task framed as an exam. Confidence judgements were collected in the form of a 'predicted exam grade'. Finally, we collected 'meta-metacognitive' reports in a two-interval forced-choice design: trials were presented in pairs, and participants had to select that in which they thought their confidence (predicted grade) best matched their accuracy (actual grade), effectively minimizing their quadratic scoring rule (QSR) score. Participants successfully selected trials on which their metacognition was better when metacognitive performance was quantified using area under the type 2 ROC (AUROC2) but not when using the 'gold-standard' measure m-ratio. However, further analyses suggested that participants selected trials on which AUROC2 is lower in part via an extreme-confidence heuristic, rather than through explicit evaluation of metacognitive inferences: when restricting analyses to trials on which participants gave the same confidence rating AUROC2 no longer differed as a function of selection, and likewise when we excluded trials on which extreme confidence ratings were given. Together, our results show that participants are able to make effective metacognitive discriminations on their visual confidence ratings, but that explicit 'meta-metacognitive' processes may not be required. Competing Interests: None declared. (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press.) |
| References: | Conscious Cogn. 2015 Sep;35:53-65. (PMID: 25973773) J Neurosci. 2010 Jun 9;30(23):8032-41. (PMID: 20534851) Perspect Psychol Sci. 2022 Nov;17(6):1746-1765. (PMID: 35839099) Annu Rev Psychol. 2011;62:451-82. (PMID: 21126183) Psychol Rev. 2021 Jan;128(1):45-70. (PMID: 32673034) Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2012 Aug 5;367(1599):2213-23. (PMID: 22734064) Conscious Cogn. 2012 Mar;21(1):422-30. (PMID: 22071269) Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):433-6. (PMID: 9176952) Psychol Methods. 2013 Dec;18(4):535-52. (PMID: 24079931) Trends Cogn Sci. 2014 Apr;18(4):186-93. (PMID: 24582436) Nat Hum Behav. 2023 Jan;7(1):142-154. (PMID: 36344656) J Cogn Neurosci. 2016 Sep;28(9):1318-30. (PMID: 27082046) Psychon Bull Rev. 2003 Dec;10(4):843-76. (PMID: 15000533) J Exp Soc Psychol. 1997 Jul;33(4):345-66. (PMID: 9247369) Neurosci Conscious. 2023 Nov 07;2023(1):niad023. (PMID: 38046654) J Exp Psychol Gen. 1998 Mar;127(1):55-68. (PMID: 9503651) Neurosci Conscious. 2017 Apr 22;2017(1):nix007. (PMID: 29877507) Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2015 Aug;55:88-97. (PMID: 25929444) Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2012 May 19;367(1594):1310-21. (PMID: 22492749) Elife. 2016 Feb 01;5:e12192. (PMID: 26829590) J Neurosci. 2015 Feb 25;35(8):3478-84. (PMID: 25716847) Neurosci Conscious. 2022 Oct 15;2022(1):niac014. (PMID: 36267224) J Neurosci. 2016 Oct 5;36(40):10323-10336. (PMID: 27707969) |
| فهرسة مساهمة: | Keywords: confidence; meta-d; metacognition |
| تواريخ الأحداث: | Date Created: 20240523 Latest Revision: 20240524 |
| رمز التحديث: | 20240524 |
| مُعرف محوري في PubMed: | PMC11110933 |
| DOI: | 10.1093/nc/niae020 |
| PMID: | 38779689 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | MEDLINE |
Full Text Finder | تدمد: | 2057-2107 |
|---|---|
| DOI: | 10.1093/nc/niae020 |