Dataset Information

Temporal attention causes systematic biases in visual confidence.

ABSTRACT: Temporal attention enhances the perceptual representation of a stimulus at a particular point in time. The number of possible attentional episodes in a given period is limited, but whether observers' confidence reflects such limitations is still unclear. To investigate this issue, we adapted an "Attentional Blink" paradigm, presenting observers with a rapid visual stream of letters containing two targets cued for subsequent perceptual reports and confidence judgments. We found three main results. First, when two targets fell within the same attentional episode, the second target underwent a strong under-confidence bias. In other words, confidence neglected that a single attentional episode can benefit to both targets. Second, despite this initial bias, confidence was strongly correlated with response probability. Third, as confidence was yoked to the evidence used in perceptual reports, it remains blind to delays in response selection for the second target. Notably, the second target was often mistaken with a later item associated with higher confidence. These results suggest that confidence does not perfectly evaluate the limits of temporal attention in challenging situations.

SUBMITTER: Recht S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6690997 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Temporal attention causes systematic biases in visual confidence.

Recht Samuel S Mamassian Pascal P de Gardelle Vincent V

Scientific reports 20190812 1

Temporal attention enhances the perceptual representation of a stimulus at a particular point in time. The number of possible attentional episodes in a given period is limited, but whether observers' confidence reflects such limitations is still unclear. To investigate this issue, we adapted an "Attentional Blink" paradigm, presenting observers with a rapid visual stream of letters containing two targets cued for subsequent perceptual reports and confidence judgments. We found three main results ...[more]

PMID: 31406265

Similar Datasets

Project description:How attentional modulation on brain activities determines behavioral performance has been one of the most important issues in cognitive neuroscience. This issue has been addressed by comparing the temporal relationship between attentional modulations on neural activities and behavior. Our previous study measured the time course of attention with amplitude and phase coherence of steady-state visual evoked potential (SSVEP) and found that the modulation latency of phase coherence rather than that of amplitude was consistent with the latency of behavioral performance. In this study, as a complementary report, we compared the time course of visual attention shift measured by event-related potentials (ERPs) with that by target detection task. We developed a novel technique to compare ERPs with behavioral results and analyzed the EEG data in our previous study. Two sets of flickering stimulus at different frequencies were presented in the left and right visual hemifields, and a target or distracter pattern was presented randomly at various moments after an attention-cue presentation. The observers were asked to detect targets on the attended stimulus after the cue. We found that two ERP components, P300 and N2pc, were elicited by the target presented at the attended location. Time-course analyses revealed that attentional modulation of the P300 and N2pc amplitudes increased gradually until reaching a maximum and lasted at least 1.5 s after the cue onset, which is similar to the temporal dynamics of behavioral performance. However, attentional modulation of these ERP components started later than that of behavioral performance. Rather, the time course of attentional modulation of behavioral performance was more closely associated with that of the concurrently recorded SSVEPs analyzed. These results suggest that neural activities reflected not by either the P300 or N2pc, but by the SSVEPs, are the source of attentional modulation of behavioral performance.

Project description:Memory conformity may develop when people are confronted with distinct memories reported by others in social situations and knowingly/unknowingly adhere to these exogenous memories. Earlier research on memory conformity suggests that (1) subjects were more likely to conform to confederate with high confidence; (2) subjects with low confidence on their memory accuracy were more likely to conform, and; (3) this subjective confidence could be adjusted by social manipulations. Nonetheless, it remains unclear how the confidence levels of ours and others may interact and produce a combined effect on our degree of conformity. More importantly, is memory conformity, defined by a complete adoption of the opposite side, the result of a gradual accumulation of subtler changes at the confidence level, i.e., a buildup of confidence conformity? Here, we followed participant's confidence transformation quantitatively over three confederate sessions in a memory test. After studying a set of human motion videos, participants had to answer simultaneously whether a target or lure video had appeared before by indicating their side (i.e., Yes/No) and their associated confidence rating. Participants were allowed to adjust their responses as they were being shown randomly-generated confederates' answers and confidence values. Results show that participants indeed demonstrated confidence conformity. Interestingly, they tended to become committed to their side early on and gain confidence gradually over subsequent sessions. This polarizing behaviour may be explained by two kinds of preferences: (1) Participant's confidence enhancement towards same-sided confederates was greater in magnitude compared to the decrement towards an opposite-sided confederate; and (2) Participants had the most effective confidence boost when the same-sided confederates shared similar, but not considerably different, confidence level to theirs. In other words, humans exhibit side- and similarity-biases during confidence conformity.

Project description:Visual attention is thought to be driven by the interplay between low-level visual features and task dependent information content of local image regions, as well as by spatial viewing biases. Though dependent on experimental paradigms and model assumptions, this idea has given rise to varying claims that either bottom-up or top-down mechanisms dominate visual attention. To contribute toward a resolution of this discussion, here we quantify the influence of these factors and their relative importance in a set of classification tasks. Our stimuli consist of individual image patches (bubbles). For each bubble we derive three measures: a measure of salience based on low-level stimulus features, a measure of salience based on the task dependent information content derived from our subjects' classification responses and a measure of salience based on spatial viewing biases. Furthermore, we measure the empirical salience of each bubble based on our subjects' measured eye gazes thus characterizing the overt visual attention each bubble receives. A multivariate linear model relates the three salience measures to overt visual attention. It reveals that all three salience measures contribute significantly. The effect of spatial viewing biases is highest and rather constant in different tasks. The contribution of task dependent information is a close runner-up. Specifically, in a standardized task of judging facial expressions it scores highly. The contribution of low-level features is, on average, somewhat lower. However, in a prototypical search task, without an available template, it makes a strong contribution on par with the two other measures. Finally, the contributions of the three factors are only slightly redundant, and the semi-partial correlation coefficients are only slightly lower than the coefficients for full correlations. These data provide evidence that all three measures make significant and independent contributions and that none can be neglected in a model of human overt visual attention.

Dataset Information

Temporal attention causes systematic biases in visual confidence.

Publications

Temporal attention causes systematic biases in visual confidence.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets