Spatial attention increases performance but not subjective confidence in a discrimination task
Open accessAbstract
Selective attention to a target yields faster and more accurate responses. Faster response times, in turn, are usually associated with increased subjective confidence. Could the decrease in reaction time in the presence of attention therefore simply reflect a shift toward more confident responses? We here addressed the extent to which attention modulates accuracy, processing speed, and confidence independently. To probe the effect of spatial attention on performance, we used two attentional manipulations of a visual orientation discrimination task. We demonstrate that spatial attention significantly increases accuracy, whereas subjective confidence measures reveal overconfidence in non-attended stimuli. At constant confidence levels, reaction times showed a significant decrease (by 15-49%, corresponding to 100-250 ms). This dissociation of objective performance and subjective confidence suggests that attention and awareness, as measured by confidence, are distinct, albeit related, phenomena.
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?
Studies have documented dissociations between confidence and accuracy as a function of attention, variability in perceptual evidence, asymmetries in processing supporting and disconfirming evidence, and response times.
“Within the field of metaperception research, studies have documented dissociations between confidence and accuracy as a function of attention (e.g., Wilimzig et al. 2008), variability in perceptual evidence (e.g., Spence et al. 2016, Zylberberg et al. 2014), asymmetries in the processing of supporting and disconfirming evidence (e.g., Miyoshi & Lau 2020, Zylberberg et al. 2012), and response times”
From Metacognition and Confidence: A Review and Synthesis (2024) · cites this paper as Wilimzig et al. 2008
Cites
The attention system of the human brain
Posner, M. I., & Petersen, S. E. (1990) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.ne.13.030190.000325 · Cited by 8,070 · cited 4× · see citing works
“Similarly, for different difficulty levels easy decisions tend to lead to underconfidence and difficult decisions to overconfidence ( Baranski & Petrusic, 1994, 1999; but see Olsson & Winman, 1996).”
BackgroundInfluentialRelative blindsight in normal observers and the neural correlate of visual consciousness
Lau, H. C., & Passingham, R. E. (2006) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0607716103 · Cited by 518 · see citing works
Confidence and accuracy of near-threshold discrimination responses
Kunimoto, C., Miller, J., & Pashler, H. (2001) · Consciousness and Cognition · doi:10.1006/ccog.2000.0494 · Cited by 291 · see citing works
Blindsight in normal observers
Kolb, F. C., & Braun, J. (1995) · Nature · doi:10.1038/377336a0 · Cited by 198 · see citing works
The relation of the time of a judgment to its accuracy
Henmon, V. A. C. (1911) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0074579 · Cited by 190 · see citing works
Blindsight in normal subjects?
Morgan, M. J., Mason, A. J. S., & Solomon, J. A. (1997) · Nature · doi:10.1038/385401b0 · Cited by 82 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Such subjective confidence measures vary in a predictable manner with the performance of human (Kolb & Braun, 1995; Morgan, Mason, & Solomon, 1997 ) and non-human subjects (Shields, Smith, Guttmannova, & Washburn, 2005; Smith et al., 1995).”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The neural basis of metacognitive ability
Fleming, S. M., & Dolan, R. J. (2012) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2011.0417 · Cited by 747 · see citing works
Suboptimality in perceptual decision making
Rahnev, D., & Denison, R. N. (2018) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x18000936 · Cited by 342 · see citing works
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
“Within the field of metaperception research, studies have documented dissociations between confidence and accuracy as a function of attention (e.g., Wilimzig et al., 2008), variability in perceptual evidence (e.g., Zylberberg et al., 2014, Spence et al., 2016), asymmetries in the processing of…”
The signal processing architecture underlying subjective reports of sensory awareness
Maniscalco, B., & Lau, H. (2016) · Neuroscience of Consciousness · doi:10.1093/nc/niw002 · Cited by 133 · see citing works
Multivoxel neurofeedback selectively modulates confidence without changing perceptual performance
Cortese, A., Amano, K., Koizumi, A., Kawato, M., & Lau, H. (2016) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms13669 · Cited by 157 · see citing works
Measures of metacognition on signal-detection theoretic models
Barrett, A. B., Dienes, Z., & Seth, A. K. (2013) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/a0033268 · Cited by 155 · see citing works
Comparing Bayesian and non-Bayesian accounts of human confidence reports
Adler, W. T., & Ma, W. J. (2018) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006572 · Cited by 118 · see citing works
Get real! Resolving the debate about equivalent social stimuli
Birmingham, E., Bischof, W. F., & Kingstone, A. (2009) · Visual Cognition · doi:10.1080/13506280902758044 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
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
Large Capacity of Conscious Access for Incidental Memories in Natural Scenes
Kaunitz, L. N., Rowe, E. G., & Tsuchiya, N. (2016) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797616658869 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Self-citationBarttfeld, P., Wicker, B., McAleer, P., Belin, P., Cojan, Y., Graziano, M., Leiguarda, R., & Sigman, M. (2013) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1301353110 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
- Authors
- Wilimzig, C., Tsuchiya, N., Fahle, M., Einhäuser, W., & Koch, C.
- Affiliations
- California Institute of Technology (US)
- University of Bremen (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Wilimzig, Claudia
- Tsuchiya, Naotsugu
- Fahle, Manfred
- Venue
- Journal of Vision
- Published
- 2008-05-19
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 7
- ISSN
- 1534-7362 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2159216956
- Cited by
- 196
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 10.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Vision (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- CaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
- G. Harold and Leila Y. Mathers Foundation
- National Institute of Mental Health
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Keywords
- spatial attention, subjective confidence, overconfidence, reaction time, visual orientation discrimination, attention and awareness, processing speed
- MeSH terms
- Attention, Awareness, Discrimination, Psychological, Fixation, Ocular, Humans, Orientation, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Psychophysics, Reaction Time, Space Perception
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
