Cited by 63Visual perception and processing mechanismsPsychology Research and BibliometricsMemory Processes and Influences

Consensus Goals in the Field of Visual Metacognition

Open access
Rahnev, Dobromir, Balsdon, Tarryn, Charles, Lucie, de Gardelle, Vincent, Denison, Rachel, Desender, Kobe, Faivre, Nathan, Filevich, Elisa +18 more·2022·Perspectives on Psychological Science

Abstract

Despite the tangible progress in psychological and cognitive sciences over the last several years, these disciplines still trail other more mature sciences in identifying the most important questions that need to be solved. Reaching such consensus could lead to greater synergy across different laboratories, faster progress, and increased focus on solving important problems rather than pursuing isolated, niche efforts. Here, 26 researchers from the field of visual metacognition reached consensus on four long-term and two medium-term common goals. We describe the process that we followed, the goals themselves, and our plans for accomplishing these goals. If this effort proves successful within the next few years, such consensus building around common goals could be adopted more widely in psychological science.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/17456916221075615

Cites

165 of 166 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The development of the Confidence Database and the adoption of consensus goals in the field have accelerated efforts in the metaperception field.

    “These endeavors have been accelerated by the development of the Confidence Database and the adoption of consensus goals in the field (Rahnev et al. 2020(Rahnev et al. , 2022)).”

    From Metacognition and Confidence: A Review and Synthesis (2024) · cites this paper as Rahnev et al. 2022

    The Conclusion (page unavailable) says common goals can accelerate progress in visual metacognition, but adds that “only time will tell” how this effort will affect the field. It therefore supports the proposed benefit of consensus goals, not the claim that they have already accelerated efforts. The Confidence Database is separately cited to Rahnev et al. (2020) in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Baars B (1997). Contrastive phenomenology: A thoroughly empirical approach to consciousness. In Block N, Flanagan O, & Güzeldere G (Eds.), The Nature of Consciousness: Philosophical Debates (pp. 187– 202). MIT Press. https://philpapers.org/rec/BAACPA
  2. Rouault M, Weiss A, Lee JK, Bouté J, Drugowitsch J, Chambon V, & Wyart V (2021). Specific cognitive signatures of information seeking in controllable environments. BioRxiv. 10.1101/2021.01.04.425114 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rahnev, D., Balsdon, T., Charles, L., de Gardelle, V., Denison, R., Desender, K., Faivre, N., Filevich, E., Fleming, S. M., Jehee, J., Lau, H., Lee, A. L. F., Locke, S. M., Mamassian, P., Odegaard, B., Peters, M., Reyes, G., Rouault, M., Sackur, J., Samaha, J., Sergent, C., Sherman, M. T., Siedlecka, M., Soto, D., Vlassova, A., & Zylberberg, A.
Affiliations
  • Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • University College London (GB)
  • Paris School of Economics & Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
  • Boston University (US)
  • VIB-KU Leuven Center for Brain & Disease Research (BE)
  • Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience Berlin (DE)
  • Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Lingnan University (HK)
  • University of Florida (US)
  • University of California, Irvine (US)
  • Facultad de Psicología, Universidad del Desarrollo
  • Université Paris Sciences et Lettres (FR)
  • Département d’Études Cognitives, École Normale Supérieure, Université Paris Sciences & Lettres (PSL University), Paris, France
  • University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
  • Université Paris Cité (FR)
  • University of Sussex (GB)
  • Jagiellonian University (PL)
  • Ikerbasque (ES)
  • Mortimer B. Zuckerman Mind Brain Behavior Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Rahnev, Dobromir
Venue
Perspectives on Psychological Science
Published
2022-07-15
Volume
17
Issue
6
Pages
1746-1765
ISSN
  • 1745-6916 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-6924
OpenAlex
W4285492509
Cited by
63
References
165
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4
FWCI
6.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Perspectives on Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Sussex Research Online (University of Sussex) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Homo Politicus (Academy of Humanities and Economics in Lodz) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Communities in ADDI (University of the Basque Country) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Hispana (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion)
  • Oskar-Bordeaux (Universite de Bordeaux) (submittedVersion)
  • Queen Mary Research Online (Queen Mary University of London) (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Office of Naval Research (N00014-20-1-2622)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH119189)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Psychology Research and Bibliometrics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
Keywords
consensus building, research objectives, visual perception, metacognition, research agenda
MeSH terms
Metacognition, Achievement, Goals, Humans, Consensus

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