Cited by 170Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeural dynamics and brain functionDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Neural evidence accumulation persists after choice to inform metacognitive judgments

Open access
Murphy, Peter R, Robertson, Ian H, Harty, Siobhán, O'Connell, Redmond G·2015·eLife

Abstract

The ability to revise one’s certainty or confidence in a preceding choice is a critical feature of adaptive decision-making but the neural mechanisms underpinning this metacognitive process have yet to be characterized. In the present study, we demonstrate that the same build-to-threshold decision variable signal that triggers an initial choice continues to evolve after commitment, and determines the timing and accuracy of self-initiated error detection reports by selectively representing accumulated evidence that the preceding choice was incorrect. We also show that a peri-choice signal generated in medial frontal cortex provides a source of input to this post-decision accumulation process, indicating that metacognitive judgments are not solely based on the accumulation of feedforward sensory evidence. These findings impart novel insights into the generative mechanisms of metacognition.

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 · 10.7554/elife.11946

Cites

73 of 74 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 ramping-like characteristics of the centroparietal EEG signal, the Pe, are consistent with postdecisional evidence accumulation in a self-related reference frame.

    “Murphy et al. (2015) found that the ramping-like characteristics of a centroparietal electroencephalogram (EEG) signal, the Pe, was consistent with postdecisional evidence accumulation in a self-related reference frame.”

    From Metacognition and Confidence: A Review and Synthesis (2024) · cites this paper as Murphy et al. 2015

  • The postdecisional build-up rate of the Pe is proportional to the speed of subjective error detection, and it reaches a constant amplitude at the point of detection that is independent of error-detection response time.

    “The postdecisional build-up rate of this signal was proportional to the speed of subjective error detection, and it reached a constant amplitude at the point of detection that was independent of error-detection response time.”

    From Metacognition and Confidence: A Review and Synthesis (2024) · cites this paper as Murphy et al. 2015

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Murphy, P. R., Robertson, I. H., Harty, S., & O'Connell, R. G.
Affiliations
  • Leiden University (NL)
  • Trinity College Dublin (IE)
  • Trinity College Institute of Neuroscience, School of Psychology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
Corresponding author
Murphy, Peter R
Venue
eLife
Published
2015-12-19
Volume
4
ISSN
2050-084X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2207026948
Cited by
170
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 9
FWCI
7.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • eLife (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • Arrow@dit (Dublin Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Trinity's Access to Research Output (TARA) (Trinity College Dublin) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Irish Research Council (Postgraduate Fellowship)
  • European Research Council (Starting Grant 63829)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
metacognition, evidence accumulation, confidence judgments, error detection, medial frontal cortex, decision-making
MeSH terms
Metacognition, Decision Making, Electroencephalography, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Judgment, Healthy Volunteers

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