Prior Information Shapes Perceptual Confidence.

Q1 Psychology Journal of Cognition Pub Date : 2025-01-07 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.5334/joc.417
Luca Tarasi, Margherita Covelli, Chiara Tabarelli de Fatis, Vincenzo Romei
{"title":"Prior Information Shapes Perceptual Confidence.","authors":"Luca Tarasi, Margherita Covelli, Chiara Tabarelli de Fatis, Vincenzo Romei","doi":"10.5334/joc.417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Decisional confidence refers to the subjective evaluation of the accuracy of a decision based on sensory information. While these judgments are typically grounded in the strength of evidence leading to a decision, they are also subjected to influence from top-down factors such as prior expectations. Previous research has highlighted the impact of prior information on decision parameters such as reaction times and decision criteria placement. However, a comprehensive understanding of how prior information shapes confidence ratings is still lacking. In this study, we manipulate prior knowledge by inducing varying levels of target probability expectation (low: 33%, random: 50%, high: 67%) in a perceptual detection task. In each trial both type-1 (detection) and type-2 (confidence) responses were recorded. First, we replicate previous findings, demonstrating that decisional priors impact decision criteria but not task sensitivity. Secondly, we reveal the strong effect that prior expectations exert on type-2 decisions, with this influence being moderated by a congruency effect between the given prior, the actual stimulus presented, and the provided response. Moreover, we find that confidence is higher in correct compared to incorrect responses, with low-probability trials leading to higher confidence judgments in correct choices compared to random and liberal trials. Finally, we unveil that prior-dependent modulation rates in criterion and confidence were positively associated. These results underscore the intricate interplay between prior expectations, decision-making, and confidence levels, demonstrating that what we perceive is not solely a data-driven phenomenon but can be already shaped by the available information about the state of the world.</p>","PeriodicalId":32728,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cognition","volume":"8 1","pages":"11"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11736391/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.417","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Decisional confidence refers to the subjective evaluation of the accuracy of a decision based on sensory information. While these judgments are typically grounded in the strength of evidence leading to a decision, they are also subjected to influence from top-down factors such as prior expectations. Previous research has highlighted the impact of prior information on decision parameters such as reaction times and decision criteria placement. However, a comprehensive understanding of how prior information shapes confidence ratings is still lacking. In this study, we manipulate prior knowledge by inducing varying levels of target probability expectation (low: 33%, random: 50%, high: 67%) in a perceptual detection task. In each trial both type-1 (detection) and type-2 (confidence) responses were recorded. First, we replicate previous findings, demonstrating that decisional priors impact decision criteria but not task sensitivity. Secondly, we reveal the strong effect that prior expectations exert on type-2 decisions, with this influence being moderated by a congruency effect between the given prior, the actual stimulus presented, and the provided response. Moreover, we find that confidence is higher in correct compared to incorrect responses, with low-probability trials leading to higher confidence judgments in correct choices compared to random and liberal trials. Finally, we unveil that prior-dependent modulation rates in criterion and confidence were positively associated. These results underscore the intricate interplay between prior expectations, decision-making, and confidence levels, demonstrating that what we perceive is not solely a data-driven phenomenon but can be already shaped by the available information about the state of the world.

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
先验信息塑造知觉信心。
决策自信是指基于感官信息对决策准确性的主观评价。虽然这些判断通常以导致决定的证据的力度为基础,但它们也受到诸如先前预期等自上而下因素的影响。先前的研究强调了先验信息对决策参数的影响,如反应时间和决策标准的放置。然而,对先验信息如何塑造信心评级的全面理解仍然缺乏。在本研究中,我们通过在感知检测任务中诱导不同水平的目标概率期望(低:33%,随机:50%,高:67%)来操纵先验知识。在每个试验中,记录了1型(检测)和2型(置信度)的反应。首先,我们重复了先前的研究结果,证明决策先验影响决策标准,但不影响任务敏感性。其次,我们揭示了先验期望对二型决策的强烈影响,这种影响被给定先验、实际刺激和提供反应之间的一致性效应所调节。此外,我们发现,与错误反应相比,正确反应的信心更高,与随机和自由试验相比,低概率试验导致对正确选择的信心判断更高。最后,我们揭示了先前依赖的调制率在标准和置信度正相关。这些结果强调了先前预期、决策和信心水平之间错综复杂的相互作用,表明我们所感知的不仅仅是数据驱动的现象,而是已经由有关世界状态的可用信息塑造的。
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
Journal of Cognition
Journal of Cognition Psychology-Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
43
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Long-term Contingency Learning Depends on Contingency Awareness. I am Once Again Asking for Your Attention: A Replication of Feature-Based Attention Modulations of Binding Effects with Picture Stimuli. Implicit Learning of Parity and Magnitude Associations with Number Color. Exploring Inhibitory Control Processes in Highly Superior Autobiographical Memory (HSAM): A Single Case Study. Readiness for Perception and Action: Towards a More Mechanistic Understanding of Phasic Alertness.
×
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