Bringing action into the picture. How action influences visual awareness

Anzulewicz, Anna; Hobot, Justyna; Siedlecka, Marta; Wierzchoń, Michał

doi:10.3758/s13414-019-01781-w

Cited by 16 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The past years have seen a growing interest in elucidating the sources of information that contribute to confidence judgments, as a window into potential computational processes that allow the brain to monitor itself. Converging evidence from very different experimental paradigms suggested that confidence is modulated by motor information concurrent with the first-order response (Faivre et al, 2017;Fleming et al, 2015;Patel et al, 2012;Pereira et al, 2018); for a review see (Anzulewicz, Hobot, Siedlecka, & Wierzchoń, 2019). Here, we set out to directly investigate this possibility.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response-related signals increase confidence but not metacognitive performance

Filevich

Koß

Faivre³

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AbstractConfidence judgements are a central tool for research in metacognition. In a typical task, participants first perform perceptual (first-order) decisions and then rate their confidence in these decisions. The relationship between confidence and first-order accuracy is taken as measure of metacognitive performance. Confidence is often assumed to stem from decision-monitoring processes alone, but processes that co-occur with the first-order decision may also play a role in confidence formation. In fact, across a broad range of tasks, trials with quick reaction times to the first-order task are often judged with relatively higher confidence than those with slow responses. This robust finding suggests that confidence could be informed by a readout of reaction times in addition to decision-monitoring processes. To test this possibility, we assessed the contribution of response-related signals to confidence and, in particular, to metacognitive performance (i.e., a measure of the adequacy of these confidence judgements). In a factorial design, we measured the effect of making an overt (vs. covert) decision, as well as the effect of pairing a motor action to the stimulus about which the first-order decision is made. Against our expectations, we found no differences in overall confidence or metacognitive performance when first-order responses were covert as opposed to overt. Further, actions paired to visual stimuli presented led to higher confidence ratings, but did not affect metacognitive performance. These results suggest that some of the relationships between first-order decisional signals and confidence might indeed be correlational, and attributable to an upstream cognitive process, common to the two of them.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response-related signals increase confidence but not metacognitive performance

Filevich

Koß

Faivre³

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The past years have seen a growing interest in elucidating the sources of information that contribute to confidence judgments, as a window into potential computational processes that allow us to monitor our own thoughts. Converging evidence from very different experimental paradigms suggested that confidence is modulated by motor information concurrent with the first-order response (Baranski & Petrusic, 1995, 1998Fetsch, Kiani, Newsome, & Shadlen, 2014;Kiani, Corthell, & Shadlen, 2014;Moran, Teodorescu, & Usher, 2015;Ratcliff & Starns, 2013;Vickers & Packer, 1982;Douglas Vickers, Burt, Smith, & Brown, 1985;Zylberberg, Fetsch, & Shadlen, 2016, For a review see Anzulewicz et al, 2019). Here, we set out to directly investigate this possibility.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response-Related Signals Increase Confidence But Not Metacognitive Performance

Filevich

Koß

Faivre

2020

eNeuro

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Confidence judgements are a central tool in metacognition research. In a typical task, participants first perform perceptual (first-order) decisions and then rate their confidence in these decisions. The relationship between confidence and first-order accuracy is taken as a measure of metacognitive performance. Confidence is often assumed to stem from decision-monitoring processes alone, but processes that co-occur with the first-order decision may also play a role in confidence formation. In fact, some recent studies have revealed that directly manipulating motor regions in the brain, or the time of first-order decisions relative to second-order ones affects confidence judgements. This finding suggests that confidence could be informed by a readout of reaction times in addition to decision-monitoring processes. To test this possibility, we assessed the contribution of response-related signals to confidence and, in particular, to metacognitive performance (i.e., a measure of the adequacy of these confidence judgements). In human volunteers, we measured the effect of making an overt (vs. covert) decision, as well as the effect of pairing an action to the stimulus about which the first-order decision is made. Against our expectations, we found no differences in overall confidence or metacognitive performance when first-order responses were covert as opposed to overt. Further, actions paired to visual stimuli presented led to higher confidence ratings, but did not affect metacognitive performance. These results suggest that confidence ratings do not always incorporate motor information. 4 Significance statement To measure metacognition, or the ability to monitor one s own thoughts, experimental tasks often require human volunteers to, first, make a perceptual decision (first-order task") and, then, rate their confidence in their own decision (second-order task"). In this paradigm, both first and second-order information could, in principle, influence confidence judgements. But only the latter is truly metacognitive. To determine whether confidence is a valid metacognitive measure, we compared confidence ratings between two conditions: with overt responses, where participants provided both first-and second-order responses; and with covert responses where participants reported their confidence in a decision that they had not executed. Removing first-order decisions did not affect confidence, which validates confidence as an introspective measure.

show abstract

“…These studies' authors suggested that carrying out a behavioral response acts as an additional source of evidence for metacognitive judgments. Following this, Anzulewicz et al (2019) listed four possible mechanisms through which action planning or execution could influence reported awareness. They point to possible (1) indirect effects that stem from motor cortex activity that affects cognitive processing, (2) perceptual evidence accumulation being influenced by attentional engagement, (3) enhancement of performance monitoring, and (4) integration of additional (including post-perceptual) evidence with the evidence accumulation process.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%