A decision-congruent heuristic gives superior metacognitive sensitivity under realistic variance assumptions.
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Psychophysical studies on confidence construction are often grounded in bidimensional signal detection theory (SDT) and its relatives. However, these studies often stand on oversimplified assumptions of (a) bidimensional variance-equality and (b) bidimensional statistical independence. The present study simulated 2-alternative forced-choice and confidence rating performances, incorporating more empirically plausible variance-covariance structures. One prominent observation is that superior metacognitive accuracy can be achieved when one applies a heuristic in which the response-incongruent dimension of information is ignored. This is because such an heuristic takes advantage of the specific unequal-variance structure, which paradoxically cannot be easily exploited if both dimensions are evaluated together. Furthermore, under a variety of internal statistical structures, this simple heuristic predicts dissociations of objective decision and subjective metacognition, which have been empirically observed. Also, it provides a tentative account of some behavioral features of blindsight. Therefore, this surprisingly simple decision heuristic may inspire novel perspectives on metacognition and consciousness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Initial theoretical explanations proposed that the PEB may result from a bias in the broadcast or readout of propositional confidence estimates, or from a heuristic applied to evidence spaces that are often detection- rather than discrimination-like.
“Initial theoretical explanations proposed that the PEB may result from a bias in the broadcast or readout of propositional confidence estimates, or from a heuristic applied to evidence spaces that are often detection-rather than discrimination-like (Maniscalco et al. 2021, Miyoshi & Lau 2020).”
From Metacognition and Confidence: A Review and Synthesis (2024) · cites this paper as Miyoshi & Lau 2020
Cites
Doubly Bayesian Analysis of Confidence in Perceptual Decision-Making
Aitchison, L., Bang, D., Bahrami, B., & Latham, P. E. (2015) · PLOS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004519 · Cited by 131 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Metacognition and Confidence: A Review and Synthesis
Fleming, S. M. (2024) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-022423-032425 · Cited by 256 · see citing works
“Initial theoretical explanations proposed that the PEB may result from a bias in the broadcast or readout of propositional confidence estimates, or a heuristic applied to evidence spaces that are often detection-rather than discrimination-like (Miyoshi & Lau, 2020, Maniscalco et al., 2021).”
Consensus Goals in the Field of Visual Metacognition
Rahnev, D., Balsdon, T., Charles, L., de Gardelle, V., Denison, R., Desender, K., Faivre, N., Filevich, E., Fleming, S. M., Jehee, J., et al. (2022) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/17456916221075615 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Self-citationNatural statistics support a rational account of confidence biases
Webb, T. W., Miyoshi, K., So, T. Y., Rajananda, S., & Lau, H. (2023) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-39737-2 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Miyoshi, K., & Lau, H.
- Venue
- Psychological Review
- Published
- 2020-10
- Volume
- 127
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 655-671
- ISSN
- 0033-295X (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1471
- OpenAlex
- W3010677826
- Cited by
- 33
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3
- FWCI
- 3.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Psychological Review (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (17J01808)
- National Institutes of Health (R01NS088628)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Keywords
- metacognition, covariance structure, metacognitive sensitivity, confidence ratings, two-alternative forced choice, blindsight, consciousness
- MeSH terms
- Heuristics, Metacognition, Consciousness, Decision Making, Humans
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review