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...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
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 |