Suprathreshold perceptual decisions constrain models of confidence.


Journal

PLoS computational biology
ISSN: 1553-7358
Titre abrégé: PLoS Comput Biol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101238922

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
07 2022
Historique:
received: 13 12 2021
accepted: 19 06 2022
revised: 08 08 2022
pubmed: 28 7 2022
medline: 11 8 2022
entrez: 27 7 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Perceptual confidence is an important internal signal about the certainty of our decisions and there is a substantial debate on how it is computed. We highlight three confidence metric types from the literature: observers either use 1) the full probability distribution to compute probability correct (Probability metrics), 2) point estimates from the perceptual decision process to estimate uncertainty (Evidence-Strength metrics), or 3) heuristic confidence from stimulus-based cues to uncertainty (Heuristic metrics). These metrics are rarely tested against one another, so we examined models of all three types on a suprathreshold spatial discrimination task. Observers were shown a cloud of dots sampled from a dot generating distribution and judged if the mean of the distribution was left or right of centre. In addition to varying the horizontal position of the mean, there were two sensory uncertainty manipulations: the number of dots sampled and the spread of the generating distribution. After every two perceptual decisions, observers made a confidence forced-choice judgement whether they were more confident in the first or second decision. Model results showed that the majority of observers were best-fit by either: 1) the Heuristic model, which used dot cloud position, spread, and number of dots as cues; or 2) an Evidence-Strength model, which computed the distance between the sensory measurement and discrimination criterion, scaled according to sensory uncertainty. An accidental repetition of some sessions also allowed for the measurement of confidence agreement for identical pairs of stimuli. This N-pass analysis revealed that human observers were more consistent than their best-fitting model would predict, indicating there are still aspects of confidence that are not captured by our modelling. As such, we propose confidence agreement as a useful technique for computational studies of confidence. Taken together, these findings highlight the idiosyncratic nature of confidence computations for complex decision contexts and the need to consider different potential metrics and transformations in the confidence computation.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35895747
doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010318
pii: PCOMPBIOL-D-21-02252
pmc: PMC9359550
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e1010318

Subventions

Organisme : NEI NIH HHS
ID : R01 EY008266
Pays : United States

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Références

J Exp Psychol Gen. 2019 Mar;148(3):437-452
pubmed: 30382720
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2022 Jul 15;:17456916221075615
pubmed: 35839099
Proc Biol Sci. 2012 Dec 7;279(1748):4853-60
pubmed: 23034708
Annu Rev Neurosci. 2007;30:535-74
pubmed: 17600525
Behav Brain Sci. 2018 Feb 27;41:e223
pubmed: 29485020
Psychon Bull Rev. 2003 Dec;10(4):843-76
pubmed: 15000533
Psychol Rev. 2021 Jul 29;:
pubmed: 34323580
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Nov 30;107(48):20834-9
pubmed: 21076036
J Vis. 2019 Jun 3;19(6):24
pubmed: 31251808
PLoS Comput Biol. 2015 Jun 15;11(6):e1004305
pubmed: 26076466
Front Integr Neurosci. 2012 Sep 21;6:79
pubmed: 23049504
Cognition. 2020 Jan;194:104041
pubmed: 31470186
Nat Neurosci. 2015 Aug;18(8):1152-8
pubmed: 26120962
Annu Rev Vis Sci. 2016 Oct 14;2:459-481
pubmed: 28532359
Front Hum Neurosci. 2014 Jul 15;8:443
pubmed: 25076880
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2016 Apr;78(3):923-37
pubmed: 26791233
Nat Commun. 2020 Apr 9;11(1):1753
pubmed: 32273500
Neurosci Conscious. 2016 Jan;2016(1):
pubmed: 27499929
Elife. 2021 Apr 30;10:
pubmed: 33929323
Trends Cogn Sci. 2012 Oct;16(10):511-8
pubmed: 22981359
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018 Oct 23;115(43):11090-11095
pubmed: 30297430
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2016 May;42(5):671-82
pubmed: 26594876
J Opt Soc Am A. 1988 Apr;5(4):617-27
pubmed: 3404312
Psychon Bull Rev. 2018 Dec;25(6):2083-2101
pubmed: 29557067
PLoS One. 2015 Mar 20;10(3):e0120870
pubmed: 25793275
Nat Neurosci. 2019 Apr;22(4):514-523
pubmed: 30804531
Elife. 2016 Oct 27;5:
pubmed: 27787198
Annu Rev Psychol. 2011;62:451-82
pubmed: 21126183
Psychol Rev. 2010 Jul;117(3):864-901
pubmed: 20658856
Psychol Rev. 2017 Jan;124(1):91-114
pubmed: 28004960
Nat Hum Behav. 2017 Nov;1(11):810-818
pubmed: 29152591
Vision Res. 2012 Sep 15;69:1-9
pubmed: 22835631
Neuroimage. 2009 Jul 15;46(4):1004-17
pubmed: 19306932
Nat Neurosci. 2011 Oct 23;14(12):1513-5
pubmed: 22019729
J Vis. 2021 May 3;21(5):21
pubmed: 34010953
Cognition. 2020 Dec;205:104396
pubmed: 32771212
Cognition. 2016 Jan;146:377-86
pubmed: 26513356
Nat Hum Behav. 2021 Feb;5(2):273-280
pubmed: 32958899
Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):437-42
pubmed: 9176953
Curr Biol. 2016 Dec 5;26(23):3157-3168
pubmed: 27866891
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2018 Oct;71(10):2223-2234
pubmed: 30226435
PLoS Comput Biol. 2018 Nov 13;14(11):e1006572
pubmed: 30422974
Science. 2010 Sep 17;329(5998):1541-3
pubmed: 20847276
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Oct 24;97(22):12380-4
pubmed: 11050253
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2017 Aug;43(8):1520-1531
pubmed: 28383959
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2020 Aug;82(6):3158-3175
pubmed: 32383111
Psychol Sci. 2015 Nov;26(11):1664-80
pubmed: 26408037
Psychol Rev. 2021 Jan;128(1):45-70
pubmed: 32673034
PLoS One. 2009;4(3):e4909
pubmed: 19290055
Neurosci Conscious. 2021 Nov 15;2021(1):niab039
pubmed: 34804591
J Vis. 2006 Feb 22;6(4):311-21
pubmed: 16889471
Nat Commun. 2020 Apr 24;11(1):2004
pubmed: 32332712
Conscious Cogn. 2012 Mar;21(1):422-30
pubmed: 22071269
Conscious Cogn. 2014 Jul;27:246-53
pubmed: 24951943
Nat Neurosci. 2014 May;17(5):738-43
pubmed: 24686785
Front Neurosci. 2012 Jan 19;6:1
pubmed: 22294978
Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):433-6
pubmed: 9176952
Nat Neurosci. 2016 Mar;19(3):366-74
pubmed: 26906503
Psychol Methods. 2013 Dec;18(4):535-52
pubmed: 24079931
PLoS Comput Biol. 2015 Oct 30;11(10):e1004519
pubmed: 26517475
Neuron. 2014 Dec 17;84(6):1329-42
pubmed: 25521381
Perception. 2020 Jun;49(6):616-635
pubmed: 32552488
Neuron. 2016 May 4;90(3):499-506
pubmed: 27151640
Neuroimage. 2014 Jan 1;84:971-85
pubmed: 24018303

Auteurs

Shannon M Locke (SM)

Laboratoire des Systèmes Perceptifs, Département d'Études Cognitives, École Normale Supérieure, PSL University, CNRS, Paris, France.

Michael S Landy (MS)

Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, New York, United States of America.
Center for Neural Science, New York University, New York, New York, United States of America.

Pascal Mamassian (P)

Laboratoire des Systèmes Perceptifs, Département d'Études Cognitives, École Normale Supérieure, PSL University, CNRS, Paris, France.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH