Dynamic influences on static measures of metacognition

被引:19
|
作者
Desender, Kobe [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Vermeylen, Luc [3 ]
Verguts, Tom [3 ]
机构
[1] Katholieke Univ Leuven, Brain & Cognit, Leuven, Belgium
[2] Univ Med Ctr Hamburg Eppendorf, Dept Neurophysiol & Pathophysiol, Hamburg, Germany
[3] Univ Ghent, Dept Expt Psychol, Ghent, Belgium
基金
比利时弗兰德研究基金会;
关键词
SIGNAL-DETECTION; DECISION-MAKING; CONFIDENCE; ACCURACY; PERFORMANCE; JUDGMENTS; CLOSURE; MODELS; CHOICE; MEMORY;
D O I
10.1038/s41467-022-31727-0
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
The authors show that current measures of metacognition are confounded with response caution, both in simulations and empirical data. They propose an alternative dynamic measure of metacognition. Humans differ in their capability to judge choice accuracy via confidence judgments. Popular signal detection theoretic measures of metacognition, such as M-ratio, do not consider the dynamics of decision making. This can be problematic if response caution is shifted to alter the tradeoff between speed and accuracy. Such shifts could induce unaccounted-for sources of variation in the assessment of metacognition. Instead, evidence accumulation frameworks consider decision making, including the computation of confidence, as a dynamic process unfolding over time. Using simulations, we show a relation between response caution and M-ratio. We then show the same pattern in human participants explicitly instructed to focus on speed or accuracy. Finally, this association between M-ratio and response caution is also present across four datasets without any reference towards speed. In contrast, when data are analyzed with a dynamic measure of metacognition, v-ratio, there is no effect of speed-accuracy tradeoff.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] PODEM based on static testability measures and dynamic testability measures for multiple-valued logic circuits
    Kamiura, N
    Isokawa, T
    Matsui, N
    ISMVL 2002: 32ND IEEE INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON MULTIPLE-VALUED LOGIC, PROCEEDINGS, 2002, : 149 - 155
  • [42] Influences of sex, type and intensity of emotion in the ecognition of static and dynamic facial expressions
    Torro-Alves, Nelson
    De Oliveira Bezerra, Izabela Alves
    Gomes E Claudino, Rianne
    Laurindo Pereira, Thobias Cavalcanti
    AVANCES EN PSICOLOGIA LATINOAMERICANA, 2013, 31 (01): : 192 - 199
  • [43] Pretraining Influences and Readiness to Change Dimensions: A Focus on Static Versus Dynamic Issues
    Steele-Johnson, Debra
    Narayan, Anupama
    Delgado, Kristin M.
    Cole, Phyllis
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE, 2010, 46 (02): : 245 - 274
  • [44] Assessment of metacognition.: II -: Concurrent measures.
    Huet, N
    Mariné, C
    ANNEE PSYCHOLOGIQUE, 1998, 98 (04): : 727 - 742
  • [45] Measures of Metacognition on Signal-Detection Theoretic Models
    Barrett, Adam B.
    Dienes, Zoltan
    Seth, Anil K.
    PSYCHOLOGICAL METHODS, 2013, 18 (04) : 535 - 552
  • [46] Relationship Between Physical Activity and Measures of Static and Dynamic Balance in Older Adults
    Morales, Julio
    Vengurlekar, Rasika
    MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2010, 42 (05): : 407 - 407
  • [47] DYNAMIC AND STATIC MEASURES OF GROWTH AMONG PREMENARCHEAL AND POSTMENARCHEAL FEMALES IN RURAL BANGLADESH
    RILEY, AP
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN BIOLOGY, 1990, 2 (03) : 255 - 264
  • [48] Examination of clinical and laboratory measures of static and dynamic balance in breast cancer survivors
    Evans, Elizabeth S.
    Ketcham, Caroline J.
    Hibberd, Julie C.
    Cullen, Miranda E.
    Basiliere, Julia G.
    Murphy, Dorriea L.
    PHYSIOTHERAPY THEORY AND PRACTICE, 2021, 37 (11) : 1199 - 1209
  • [49] Dynamic rather than static performance measures are needed to improve patient safety
    Krouwer J.S.
    Accreditation and Quality Assurance, 2006, 11 (12) : 644 - 646
  • [50] Dynamic versus Static Optimization of Hedge Fund Portfolios: The Relevance of Performance Measures
    Hentati, Rania
    Kaffel, Ameur
    Prigent, Jean-Luc
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BUSINESS, 2010, 15 (01): : 1 - 17