Literature DB >> 33244733

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

Sanne Kellij1,2, Johannes Fahrenfort3,4,5, Hakwan Lau6,7,8,9, Megan A K Peters10,11, Brian Odegaard12.   

Abstract

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.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Attentional blink; Metacognition; Phase scrambling; Signal Detection Theory

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33244733      PMCID: PMC7875845          DOI: 10.3758/s13414-020-02190-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 1943-3921            Impact factor:   2.199


  9 in total

1.  Visual coding and the phase structure of natural scenes.

Authors:  M G Thomson
Journal:  Network       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 1.273

2.  Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: an attentional blink? .

Authors:  J E Raymond; K L Shapiro; K M Arnell
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1992-08       Impact factor: 3.332

3.  Subjective discriminability of invisibility: a framework for distinguishing perceptual and attentional failures of awareness.

Authors:  Ryota Kanai; Vincent Walsh; Chia-huei Tseng
Journal:  Conscious Cogn       Date:  2010-07-03

4.  Neural correlates of conscious perception in the attentional blink.

Authors:  Cornelia Kranczioch; Stefan Debener; Jens Schwarzbach; Rainer Goebel; Andreas K Engel
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2004-11-24       Impact factor: 6.556

5.  The attentional blink impairs detection and delays encoding of visual information: evidence from human electrophysiology.

Authors:  Roberto Dell'Acqua; Paul E Dux; Brad Wyble; Mattia Doro; Paola Sessa; Federica Meconi; Pierre Jolicœur
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2014-11-12       Impact factor: 3.225

6.  The subjective experience of object recognition: comparing metacognition for object detection and object categorization.

Authors:  Julia D I Meuwese; Anouk M van Loon; Victor A F Lamme; Johannes J Fahrenfort
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  QUEST: a Bayesian adaptive psychometric method.

Authors:  A B Watson; D G Pelli
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1983-02

8.  Is consciousness a gradual phenomenon? Evidence for an all-or-none bifurcation during the attentional blink.

Authors:  Claire Sergent; Stanislas Dehaene
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2004-11

9.  Dynamic gamma frequency feedback coupling between higher and lower order visual cortices underlies perceptual completion in humans.

Authors:  S Moratti; C Méndez-Bértolo; F Del-Pozo; B A Strange
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-11-01       Impact factor: 6.556

  9 in total
  2 in total

Review 1.  Metacognitive asymmetries in visual perception.

Authors:  Matan Mazor; Rani Moran; Stephen M Fleming
Journal:  Neurosci Conscious       Date:  2021-10-19

2.  Metacognitive asymmetries in visual perception.

Authors:  Matan Mazor; Rani Moran; Stephen M Fleming
Journal:  Neurosci Conscious       Date:  2021-06-21
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.