时间误差监测:机构是否重要?

IF 1.7 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY Attention Perception & Psychophysics Pub Date : 2024-10-18 DOI:10.3758/s13414-024-02967-7
Tutku Öztel, Fuat Balcı
{"title":"时间误差监测:机构是否重要?","authors":"Tutku Öztel, Fuat Balcı","doi":"10.3758/s13414-024-02967-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Error monitoring is the ability to report one's errors without relying on feedback. Although error monitoring is investigated mostly with choice tasks, recent studies have discovered that participants parametrically also keep track of the magnitude and direction of their temporal, spatial, and numerical judgment errors. We investigated whether temporal error monitoring relies on internal generative processes that lead to the to-be-judged first-order timing performance. We hypothesized that if the endogenous processes underlie temporal error monitoring, one can monitor timing errors in emitted but not observed timing behaviors. We conducted six experiments to test this hypothesis. The first two experiments showed that confidence ratings were negatively related to error magnitude only in emitted behaviors, but error directionality judgments of observed behaviors were more precise. Experiment 3 replicated these effects even after controlling for the motor aspects of first-order timing performance. The last three experiments demonstrated that belief of agency (i.e., believing that the error belongs to the self or someone else) was critical in accounting for the confidence rating effects observed in the first two experiments. The precision of error directionality judgments was higher in the non-agency condition. These results show that confidence is sensitive to belief, and short-long judgment is sensitive to the actual agency of timing behavior (i.e., whether the behavior was emitted by the self or someone else).</p>","PeriodicalId":55433,"journal":{"name":"Attention Perception & Psychophysics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Temporal error monitoring: Does agency matter?\",\"authors\":\"Tutku Öztel, Fuat Balcı\",\"doi\":\"10.3758/s13414-024-02967-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Error monitoring is the ability to report one's errors without relying on feedback. Although error monitoring is investigated mostly with choice tasks, recent studies have discovered that participants parametrically also keep track of the magnitude and direction of their temporal, spatial, and numerical judgment errors. We investigated whether temporal error monitoring relies on internal generative processes that lead to the to-be-judged first-order timing performance. We hypothesized that if the endogenous processes underlie temporal error monitoring, one can monitor timing errors in emitted but not observed timing behaviors. We conducted six experiments to test this hypothesis. The first two experiments showed that confidence ratings were negatively related to error magnitude only in emitted behaviors, but error directionality judgments of observed behaviors were more precise. Experiment 3 replicated these effects even after controlling for the motor aspects of first-order timing performance. The last three experiments demonstrated that belief of agency (i.e., believing that the error belongs to the self or someone else) was critical in accounting for the confidence rating effects observed in the first two experiments. The precision of error directionality judgments was higher in the non-agency condition. These results show that confidence is sensitive to belief, and short-long judgment is sensitive to the actual agency of timing behavior (i.e., whether the behavior was emitted by the self or someone else).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55433,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Attention Perception & Psychophysics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Attention Perception & Psychophysics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-024-02967-7\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Attention Perception & Psychophysics","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-024-02967-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

错误监测是一种不依赖反馈而报告自己错误的能力。虽然错误监测主要是在选择任务中进行调查,但最近的研究发现,参与者也会参数化地跟踪其时间、空间和数字判断错误的大小和方向。我们研究了时间误差监测是否依赖于内部生成过程,从而导致待判断的一阶时间表现。我们假设,如果内生过程是时间误差监测的基础,那么人们就能监测到发出而非观察到的时间行为中的时间误差。我们进行了六个实验来验证这一假设。前两个实验表明,只有在发出行为中,置信度评级与误差大小呈负相关,但对观察行为的误差方向性判断更为精确。实验 3 复制了这些效应,即使在控制了一阶计时表现的运动方面后也是如此。后三个实验表明,相信代理(即相信错误属于自己或他人)是解释前两个实验中观察到的置信度效应的关键。在非代理条件下,错误方向性判断的精确度更高。这些结果表明,信心对信念很敏感,而短时长时判断对计时行为的实际机构(即行为是由自己还是他人发出的)很敏感。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Temporal error monitoring: Does agency matter?

Error monitoring is the ability to report one's errors without relying on feedback. Although error monitoring is investigated mostly with choice tasks, recent studies have discovered that participants parametrically also keep track of the magnitude and direction of their temporal, spatial, and numerical judgment errors. We investigated whether temporal error monitoring relies on internal generative processes that lead to the to-be-judged first-order timing performance. We hypothesized that if the endogenous processes underlie temporal error monitoring, one can monitor timing errors in emitted but not observed timing behaviors. We conducted six experiments to test this hypothesis. The first two experiments showed that confidence ratings were negatively related to error magnitude only in emitted behaviors, but error directionality judgments of observed behaviors were more precise. Experiment 3 replicated these effects even after controlling for the motor aspects of first-order timing performance. The last three experiments demonstrated that belief of agency (i.e., believing that the error belongs to the self or someone else) was critical in accounting for the confidence rating effects observed in the first two experiments. The precision of error directionality judgments was higher in the non-agency condition. These results show that confidence is sensitive to belief, and short-long judgment is sensitive to the actual agency of timing behavior (i.e., whether the behavior was emitted by the self or someone else).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
17.60%
发文量
197
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics is an official journal of the Psychonomic Society. It spans all areas of research in sensory processes, perception, attention, and psychophysics. Most articles published are reports of experimental work; the journal also presents theoretical, integrative, and evaluative reviews. Commentary on issues of importance to researchers appears in a special section of the journal. Founded in 1966 as Perception & Psychophysics, the journal assumed its present name in 2009.
期刊最新文献
Viewed touch influences tactile detection by altering decision criterion. Editorial for Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics. Inhibition of return in a 3D scene depends on the direction of depth switch between cue and target. Crossmodal correspondence of elevation/pitch and size/pitch is driven by real-world features. Effect of attention on ensemble perception: Comparison between exogenous attention, endogenous attention, and depth.
×
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