Doubly Bayesian analysis of confidence in perceptual decision-making
Humans stand out from other animals in that they are able to explicitly report on the reliability of their internal operations. This ability, which is known as metacognition, is typically studied by asking people to report their confidence in the correctness of some decision. However, the computatio...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal article |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science
2015
|
| _version_ | 1797075359456296960 |
|---|---|
| author | Aitchison, L Bang, D Bahrami, B Latham, P |
| author_facet | Aitchison, L Bang, D Bahrami, B Latham, P |
| author_sort | Aitchison, L |
| collection | OXFORD |
| description | Humans stand out from other animals in that they are able to explicitly report on the reliability of their internal operations. This ability, which is known as metacognition, is typically studied by asking people to report their confidence in the correctness of some decision. However, the computations underlying confidence reports remain unclear. In this paper, we present a fully Bayesian method for directly comparing models of confidence. Using a visual two-interval forced-choice task, we tested whether confidence reports reflect heuristic computations (e.g. the magnitude of sensory data) or Bayes optimal ones (i.e. how likely a decision is to be correct given the sensory data). In a standard design in which subjects were first asked to make a decision, and only then gave their confidence, subjects were mostly Bayes optimal. In contrast, in a less-commonly used design in which subjects indicated their confidence and decision simultaneously, they were roughly equally likely to use the Bayes optimal strategy or to use a heuristic but suboptimal strategy. Our results suggest that, while people’s confidence reports can reflect Bayes optimal computations, even a small unusual twist or additional element of complexity can prevent optimality. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-06T23:49:21Z |
| format | Journal article |
| id | oxford-uuid:720e58fb-eefe-4006-9c8f-6b9380b3d043 |
| institution | University of Oxford |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-06T23:49:21Z |
| publishDate | 2015 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | oxford-uuid:720e58fb-eefe-4006-9c8f-6b9380b3d0432022-03-26T19:47:47ZDoubly Bayesian analysis of confidence in perceptual decision-makingJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:720e58fb-eefe-4006-9c8f-6b9380b3d043Symplectic Elements at OxfordPublic Library of Science2015Aitchison, LBang, DBahrami, BLatham, PHumans stand out from other animals in that they are able to explicitly report on the reliability of their internal operations. This ability, which is known as metacognition, is typically studied by asking people to report their confidence in the correctness of some decision. However, the computations underlying confidence reports remain unclear. In this paper, we present a fully Bayesian method for directly comparing models of confidence. Using a visual two-interval forced-choice task, we tested whether confidence reports reflect heuristic computations (e.g. the magnitude of sensory data) or Bayes optimal ones (i.e. how likely a decision is to be correct given the sensory data). In a standard design in which subjects were first asked to make a decision, and only then gave their confidence, subjects were mostly Bayes optimal. In contrast, in a less-commonly used design in which subjects indicated their confidence and decision simultaneously, they were roughly equally likely to use the Bayes optimal strategy or to use a heuristic but suboptimal strategy. Our results suggest that, while people’s confidence reports can reflect Bayes optimal computations, even a small unusual twist or additional element of complexity can prevent optimality. |
| spellingShingle | Aitchison, L Bang, D Bahrami, B Latham, P Doubly Bayesian analysis of confidence in perceptual decision-making |
| title | Doubly Bayesian analysis of confidence in perceptual decision-making |
| title_full | Doubly Bayesian analysis of confidence in perceptual decision-making |
| title_fullStr | Doubly Bayesian analysis of confidence in perceptual decision-making |
| title_full_unstemmed | Doubly Bayesian analysis of confidence in perceptual decision-making |
| title_short | Doubly Bayesian analysis of confidence in perceptual decision-making |
| title_sort | doubly bayesian analysis of confidence in perceptual decision making |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT aitchisonl doublybayesiananalysisofconfidenceinperceptualdecisionmaking AT bangd doublybayesiananalysisofconfidenceinperceptualdecisionmaking AT bahramib doublybayesiananalysisofconfidenceinperceptualdecisionmaking AT lathamp doublybayesiananalysisofconfidenceinperceptualdecisionmaking |