Metacognition of perceptual resolution across and around the visual field

IF 2.8 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Cognition Pub Date : 2024-09-03 DOI:10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105938
{"title":"Metacognition of perceptual resolution across and around the visual field","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105938","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Do people have accurate metacognition of non-uniformities in perceptual resolution across (i.e., eccentricity) and around (i.e., polar angle) the visual field? Despite its theoretical and practical importance, this question has not yet been empirically tested. This study investigated metacognition of perceptual resolution by guessing patterns during a degradation (i.e., loss of high spatial frequencies) localization task. Participants localized the degraded face among the nine faces that simultaneously appeared throughout the visual field: fovea (fixation at the center of the screen), parafovea (left, right, above, and below fixation at 4° eccentricity), and periphery (left, right, above, and below fixation at 10° eccentricity). We presumed that if participants had accurate metacognition, in the absence of a degraded face, they would exhibit compensatory guessing patterns based on counterfactual reasoning (“The degraded face must have been presented at locations with lower perceptual resolution, because if it were presented at locations with higher perceptual resolution, I would have easily detected it.”), meaning that we would expect more guess responses for locations with lower perceptual resolution. In two experiments, we observed guessing patterns that suggest that people can monitor non-uniformities in perceptual resolution across, but not around, the visual field during tasks, indicating partial in-the-moment metacognition. Additionally, we found that global explicit knowledge of perceptual resolution is not sufficient to guide in-the-moment metacognition during tasks, which suggests a dissociation between local and global metacognition.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48455,"journal":{"name":"Cognition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010027724002245","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Do people have accurate metacognition of non-uniformities in perceptual resolution across (i.e., eccentricity) and around (i.e., polar angle) the visual field? Despite its theoretical and practical importance, this question has not yet been empirically tested. This study investigated metacognition of perceptual resolution by guessing patterns during a degradation (i.e., loss of high spatial frequencies) localization task. Participants localized the degraded face among the nine faces that simultaneously appeared throughout the visual field: fovea (fixation at the center of the screen), parafovea (left, right, above, and below fixation at 4° eccentricity), and periphery (left, right, above, and below fixation at 10° eccentricity). We presumed that if participants had accurate metacognition, in the absence of a degraded face, they would exhibit compensatory guessing patterns based on counterfactual reasoning (“The degraded face must have been presented at locations with lower perceptual resolution, because if it were presented at locations with higher perceptual resolution, I would have easily detected it.”), meaning that we would expect more guess responses for locations with lower perceptual resolution. In two experiments, we observed guessing patterns that suggest that people can monitor non-uniformities in perceptual resolution across, but not around, the visual field during tasks, indicating partial in-the-moment metacognition. Additionally, we found that global explicit knowledge of perceptual resolution is not sufficient to guide in-the-moment metacognition during tasks, which suggests a dissociation between local and global metacognition.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
跨视野和绕视野感知分辨率的元认知
人们对整个视野(即偏心率)和周围视野(即极角)知觉分辨率的不均匀性是否有准确的元认知?尽管这个问题在理论和实践上都很重要,但至今尚未得到实证检验。本研究通过在退化(即高空间频率损失)定位任务中猜测图案的方式,对知觉分辨率的元认知进行了研究。参与者在同时出现在整个视野中的九张面孔中对退化的面孔进行定位,这九张面孔分别是:眼窝(屏幕中心的固定位置)、眼窝旁(偏心率为 4°,固定位置的左、右、上、下)和周边(偏心率为 10°,固定位置的左、右、上、下)。我们假定,如果被试具有准确的元认知能力,那么在没有出现退化人脸的情况下,他们就会表现出基于反事实推理的补偿性猜测模式("退化人脸一定是出现在知觉分辨率较低的位置,因为如果它出现在知觉分辨率较高的位置,我就会很容易地发现它"),也就是说,我们会期望被试对知觉分辨率较低的位置做出更多的猜测反应。在两个实验中,我们观察到的猜测模式表明,人们可以在任务过程中监测整个视野而非周围视野中知觉分辨率的不均匀性,这表明了部分即时元认知。此外,我们还发现,关于知觉分辨率的全局性显性知识不足以指导任务过程中的即时元认知,这表明局部元认知和全局元认知之间存在分离。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Cognition
Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
283
期刊介绍: Cognition is an international journal that publishes theoretical and experimental papers on the study of the mind. It covers a wide variety of subjects concerning all the different aspects of cognition, ranging from biological and experimental studies to formal analysis. Contributions from the fields of psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, computer science, mathematics, ethology and philosophy are welcome in this journal provided that they have some bearing on the functioning of the mind. In addition, the journal serves as a forum for discussion of social and political aspects of cognitive science.
期刊最新文献
Absolute-judgment models better predict eyewitness decision-making than do relative-judgment models. Readers encode absolute letter positions The primacy of taxonomic semantic organization over thematic semantic organization during picture naming Do early meanings of negation map onto a fully-fledged negation concept in infancy? Speech-to-song transformation in perception and production
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1