Cargando…

An investigation of how relative precision of target encoding influences metacognitive performance

Detection failures in perceptual tasks can result from different causes: sometimes we may fail to see something because perceptual information is noisy or degraded, and sometimes we may fail to see something due to the limited capacity of attention. Previous work indicates that metacognitive capacit...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kellij, Sanne, Fahrenfort, Johannes, Lau, Hakwan, Peters, Megan A. K., Odegaard, Brian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7875845/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33244733
http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13414-020-02190-0
_version_ 1783649848448253952
author Kellij, Sanne
Fahrenfort, Johannes
Lau, Hakwan
Peters, Megan A. K.
Odegaard, Brian
author_facet Kellij, Sanne
Fahrenfort, Johannes
Lau, Hakwan
Peters, Megan A. K.
Odegaard, Brian
author_sort Kellij, Sanne
collection PubMed
description Detection failures in perceptual tasks can result from different causes: sometimes we may fail to see something because perceptual information is noisy or degraded, and sometimes we may fail to see something due to the limited capacity of attention. Previous work indicates that metacognitive capacities for detection failures may differ depending on the specific stimulus visibility manipulation employed. In this investigation, we measured metacognition while matching performance in two visibility manipulations: phase-scrambling and the attentional blink. As in previous work, metacognitive asymmetries emerged: despite matched type 1 performance, metacognitive ability (measured by area under the ROC curve) for reporting stimulus absence was higher in the attentional blink condition, which was mainly driven by metacognitive ability in correct rejection trials. We performed Signal Detection Theoretic (SDT) modeling of the results, showing that differences in metacognition under equal type I performance can be explained when the variance of the signal and noise distributions are unequal. Specifically, the present study suggests that phase scrambling signal trials have a wider distribution (more variability) than attentional blink signal trials, leading to a larger area under the ROC curve for attentional blink trials where subjects reported stimulus absence. These results provide a theoretical basis for the origin of metacognitive differences on trials where subjects report stimulus absence, and may also explain previous findings where the absence of evidence during detection tasks results in lower metacognitive performance when compared to categorization.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7875845
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78758452021-02-22 An investigation of how relative precision of target encoding influences metacognitive performance Kellij, Sanne Fahrenfort, Johannes Lau, Hakwan Peters, Megan A. K. Odegaard, Brian Atten Percept Psychophys Article Detection failures in perceptual tasks can result from different causes: sometimes we may fail to see something because perceptual information is noisy or degraded, and sometimes we may fail to see something due to the limited capacity of attention. Previous work indicates that metacognitive capacities for detection failures may differ depending on the specific stimulus visibility manipulation employed. In this investigation, we measured metacognition while matching performance in two visibility manipulations: phase-scrambling and the attentional blink. As in previous work, metacognitive asymmetries emerged: despite matched type 1 performance, metacognitive ability (measured by area under the ROC curve) for reporting stimulus absence was higher in the attentional blink condition, which was mainly driven by metacognitive ability in correct rejection trials. We performed Signal Detection Theoretic (SDT) modeling of the results, showing that differences in metacognition under equal type I performance can be explained when the variance of the signal and noise distributions are unequal. Specifically, the present study suggests that phase scrambling signal trials have a wider distribution (more variability) than attentional blink signal trials, leading to a larger area under the ROC curve for attentional blink trials where subjects reported stimulus absence. These results provide a theoretical basis for the origin of metacognitive differences on trials where subjects report stimulus absence, and may also explain previous findings where the absence of evidence during detection tasks results in lower metacognitive performance when compared to categorization. Springer US 2020-11-26 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC7875845/ /pubmed/33244733 http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13414-020-02190-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Article
Kellij, Sanne
Fahrenfort, Johannes
Lau, Hakwan
Peters, Megan A. K.
Odegaard, Brian
An investigation of how relative precision of target encoding influences metacognitive performance
title An investigation of how relative precision of target encoding influences metacognitive performance
title_full An investigation of how relative precision of target encoding influences metacognitive performance
title_fullStr An investigation of how relative precision of target encoding influences metacognitive performance
title_full_unstemmed An investigation of how relative precision of target encoding influences metacognitive performance
title_short An investigation of how relative precision of target encoding influences metacognitive performance
title_sort investigation of how relative precision of target encoding influences metacognitive performance
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7875845/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33244733
http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13414-020-02190-0
work_keys_str_mv AT kellijsanne aninvestigationofhowrelativeprecisionoftargetencodinginfluencesmetacognitiveperformance
AT fahrenfortjohannes aninvestigationofhowrelativeprecisionoftargetencodinginfluencesmetacognitiveperformance
AT lauhakwan aninvestigationofhowrelativeprecisionoftargetencodinginfluencesmetacognitiveperformance
AT petersmeganak aninvestigationofhowrelativeprecisionoftargetencodinginfluencesmetacognitiveperformance
AT odegaardbrian aninvestigationofhowrelativeprecisionoftargetencodinginfluencesmetacognitiveperformance
AT kellijsanne investigationofhowrelativeprecisionoftargetencodinginfluencesmetacognitiveperformance
AT fahrenfortjohannes investigationofhowrelativeprecisionoftargetencodinginfluencesmetacognitiveperformance
AT lauhakwan investigationofhowrelativeprecisionoftargetencodinginfluencesmetacognitiveperformance
AT petersmeganak investigationofhowrelativeprecisionoftargetencodinginfluencesmetacognitiveperformance
AT odegaardbrian investigationofhowrelativeprecisionoftargetencodinginfluencesmetacognitiveperformance