Global visual confidence.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lee ALF
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8367895 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Visual processing is fraught with uncertainty: The visual system must attempt to estimate physical properties despite missing information and noisy mechanisms. Sometimes high visual uncertainty translates into lack of confidence in our visual perception: We are aware of not seeing well. The mechanism by which we achieve this awareness--how we assess our own visual uncertainty--is unknown, but its investigation is critical to our understanding of visual decision mechanisms. The simplest possibility is that the visual system relies on cues to uncertainty, stimulus features usually associated with visual uncertainty, like blurriness. Probabilistic models of the brain suggest a more sophisticated mechanism, in which visual uncertainty is explicitly represented as probability distributions. In two separate experiments, observers performed a visual discrimination task in which confidence could be determined by the cues available (contrast and crowding or eccentricity and masking) or by their actual performance, the latter requiring a more sophisticated mechanism than cue monitoring. Results show that observers' confidence followed performance rather than cues, indicating that the mechanisms underlying the evaluation of visual confidence are relatively complex. This result supports probabilistic models, which imply the existence of sophisticated mechanisms for evaluating uncertainty.
| S-EPMC2996459 | biostudies-literature
Project description: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.
| S-EPMC6690997 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Metacognition, the ability to internally evaluate our own cognitive performance, is particularly useful since many real-life decisions lack immediate feedback. While most previous studies have focused on the construction of confidence at the level of single decisions, little is known about the formation of "global" self-performance estimates (SPEs) aggregated from multiple decisions. Here, we compare the formation of SPEs in the presence and absence of feedback, testing a hypothesis that local decision confidence supports the formation of SPEs when feedback is unavailable. We reveal that humans pervasively underestimate their performance in the absence of feedback, compared to a condition with full feedback, despite objective performance being unaffected. We find that fluctuations in confidence contribute to global SPEs over and above objective accuracy and reaction times. Our findings create a bridge between a computation of local confidence and global SPEs, and support a functional role for confidence in higher-order behavioral control.
| S-EPMC6408496 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although visual working memory (VWM) has been studied extensively, it is unknown how people form confidence judgments about their memories. Peirce (1878) speculated that Fechner's law-which states that sensation is proportional to the logarithm of stimulus intensity-might apply to confidence reports. Based on this idea, we hypothesize that humans map the precision of their VWM contents to a confidence rating through Fechner's law. We incorporate this hypothesis into the best available model of VWM encoding and fit it to data from a delayed-estimation experiment. The model provides an excellent account of human confidence rating distributions as well as the relation between performance and confidence. Moreover, the best-fitting mapping in a model with a highly flexible mapping closely resembles the logarithmic mapping, suggesting that no alternative mapping exists that accounts better for the data than Fechner's law. We propose a neural implementation of the model and find that this model also fits the behavioral data well. Furthermore, we find that jointly fitting memory errors and confidence ratings boosts the power to distinguish previously proposed VWM encoding models by a factor of 5.99 compared to fitting only memory errors. Finally, we show that Fechner's law also accounts for metacognitive judgments in a word recognition memory task, which is a first indication that it may be a general law in metacognition. Our work presents the first model to jointly account for errors and confidence ratings in VWM and could lay the groundwork for understanding the computational mechanisms of metacognition. (PsycINFO Database Record
| S-EPMC5321570 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Visual metacognition-the introspection and evaluation of one's own visual perceptual processes-is measured through both decision confidence and "metacognitive efficiency." Metacognitive efficiency refers to an individual's ability to accurately judge incorrect and correct decisions through confidence ratings given their task performance. Previous imaging studies in humans and nonhuman primates reported widely distributed brain regions being involved in decision confidence and metacognition. However, the neural correlates of metacognition are remarkably inconsistent across studies concerning spatial outline. Therefore, this study investigates the neural correlates of visual metacognition by examining co-activation across regions that scale with visual decision confidence. We hypothesized that interacting processes of perceptual and metacognitive performance contribute to the arising decision confidence in distributed, but segregable co-activating brain regions. To test this hypothesis, we performed task-fMRI in healthy humans during a visual backward masking task with four-scale, post-decision confidence ratings. We measured blood oxygenation covariation patterns, which served as a physiological proxy for co-activation across brain regions. Decision confidence ratings and an individual's metacognitive efficiency served as behavioral measures for metacognition. We found three distinct co-activation clusters involved in decision confidence: the first included right-centered fronto-temporal-parietal regions, the second included left temporal and parietal regions, and the left basal forebrain (BF), and the third included cerebellar regions. The right fronto-temporal-parietal cluster including the supplementary eye field and the right basal forebrain showed stronger co-activation in subjects with higher metacognitive efficiency. Our results provide novel evidence for co-activation of widely distributed fronto-parieto-temporal regions involved in visual confidence. The supplementary eye field was the only region that activated for both decision confidence and metacognitive efficiency, suggesting the supplementary eye field plays a key role in visual metacognition. Our results link findings in electrophysiology studies and human fMRI studies and provide evidence that confidence estimates arise from the integration of multiple information processing pathways.
| S-EPMC7683611 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Interacting or functionally related protein families tend to have similar phylogenetic trees. Based on this observation, techniques have been developed to predict interaction partners. The observed degree of similarity between the phylogenetic trees of two proteins is the result of many different factors besides the actual interaction or functional relationship between them. Such factors influence the performance of interaction predictions. One aspect that can influence this similarity is related to the fact that a given protein interacts with many others, and hence it must adapt to all of them. Accordingly, the interaction or coadaptation signal within its tree is a composite of the influence of all of the interactors. Here, we introduce a new estimator of coevolution to overcome this and other problems. Instead of relying on the individual value of tree similarity between two proteins, we use the whole network of similarities between all of the pairs of proteins within a genome to reassess the similarity of that pair, thereby taking into account its coevolutionary context. We show that this approach offers a substantial improvement in interaction prediction performance, providing a degree of accuracy/coverage comparable with, or in some cases better than, that of experimental techniques. Moreover, important information on the structure, function, and evolution of macromolecular complexes can be inferred with this methodology.
| S-EPMC2242690 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPublic trust in immunization is an increasingly important global health issue. Losses in confidence in vaccines and immunization programmes can lead to vaccine reluctance and refusal, risking disease outbreaks and challenging immunization goals in high- and low-income settings. National and international immunization stakeholders have called for better monitoring of vaccine confidence to identify emerging concerns before they evolve into vaccine confidence crises.MethodsWe perform a large-scale, data-driven study on worldwide attitudes to immunizations. This survey - which we believe represents the largest survey on confidence in immunization to date - examines perceptions of vaccine importance, safety, effectiveness, and religious compatibility among 65,819 individuals across 67 countries. Hierarchical models are employed to probe relationships between individual- and country-level socio-economic factors and vaccine attitudes obtained through the four-question, Likert-scale survey.FindingsOverall sentiment towards vaccinations is positive across all 67 countries, however there is wide variability between countries and across world regions. Vaccine-safety related sentiment is particularly negative in the European region, which has seven of the ten least confident countries, with 41% of respondents in France and 36% of respondents in Bosnia & Herzegovina reporting that they disagree that vaccines are safe (compared to a global average of 13%). The oldest age group (65+) and Roman Catholics (amongst all faiths surveyed) are associated with positive views on vaccine sentiment, while the Western Pacific region reported the highest level of religious incompatibility with vaccines. Countries with high levels of schooling and good access to health services are associated with lower rates of positive sentiment, pointing to an emerging inverse relationship between vaccine sentiments and socio-economic status.ConclusionsRegular monitoring of vaccine attitudes - coupled with monitoring of local immunization rates - at the national and sub-national levels can identify populations with declining confidence and acceptance. These populations should be prioritized to further investigate the drivers of negative sentiment and to inform appropriate interventions to prevent adverse public health outcomes.
| S-EPMC5078590 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Confidence ratings (CR) are one of the most frequently used measures in psychological research. However, recent evidence has suggested that eliciting CR from participants may result in changes to cognitive performance, so called reactivity. Here, we examine whether reactivity to CR can be better explained by added task-relevant introspection, or, alternatively, the unintentional priming of confidence-related beliefs. First, we compare participants' performance in a group making CR with a group making a task-irrelevant control rating, and a second group who made the same task-irrelevant rating, but with the word 'confident' included in the rating's wording. The results suggest that reactivity is driven by the presentation of the word 'confident', and reactivity does not require task-relevant introspection. Additionally, we show that rephrasing CR to remove the word 'confident' neutralises reactivity. This suggests that reactivity may represent a significant problem for researchers using CR, but rephrasing CR may remedy these concerns in relatively simple fashion.
| S-EPMC6557865 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundA recent estimate by the World Health Organization (WHO) suggests that 161 million persons worldwide have visual impairment, including 37 million blind (best-corrected visual acuity less than 3/60 in the better eye) and 124 million with visual impairment less severe than blindness (best-corrected acuity less than 6/18 to 3/60 in the better eye). This estimate is quoted widely, but because it is based on definitions using best-corrected visual acuity, uncorrected refractive error as a cause of visual impairment is excluded.MethodsWe reviewed data from population-based surveys of visual impairment worldwide published 1996 onwards that included presenting visual acuity, and estimated the proportion of visual impairment caused by uncorrected refractive error in different sub-regions of the world. We then extrapolated these data to estimate the worldwide burden of visual impairment including that caused by uncorrected refractive error.ResultsThe total number of persons with visual impairment worldwide, including that due to uncorrected refractive error, was estimated as 259 million, 61% higher than the commonly quoted WHO estimate. This includes 42 million persons with blindness defined as presenting visual acuity less than 3/60 in the better eye, and 217 million persons with less severe visual impairment level defined as presenting visual acuity less than 6/18 to 3/60 in the better eye, 14% and 75% higher, respectively, than the WHO estimates based on best-corrected visual acuity. Sensitivity analysis, taking into account the uncertainty of the proportion of visual impairment caused by refractive error, revealed that the number of persons in the world with visual impairment due to uncorrected refractive error could range from 82 to 117 million.ConclusionThe actual burden of visual impairment worldwide, including that caused by uncorrected refractive error, is substantially higher than the commonly quoted WHO estimate that is based on best-corrected visual acuity. We suggest that the indicative estimate of 259 million persons with visual impairment worldwide, which includes 42 million blind with visual acuity less than 3/60 in the better eye, be used for further planning of the VISION 2020 initiative instead of the often quoted 161 million estimate that includes 37 million blind.
| S-EPMC1435918 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMonitoring public confidence and hesitancy is crucial for the COVID-19 vaccine rollout. Social media listening (infoveillance) can not only monitor public attitudes on COVID-19 vaccines but also assess the dissemination of and public engagement with these opinions.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess global hesitancy, confidence, and public engagement toward COVID-19 vaccination.MethodsWe collected posts mentioning the COVID-19 vaccine between June and July 2020 on Twitter from New York (United States), London (United Kingdom), Mumbai (India), and Sao Paulo (Brazil), and Sina Weibo posts from Beijing (China). In total, we manually coded 12,886 posts from the five global metropolises with high COVID-19 burdens, and after assessment, 7032 posts were included in the analysis. We manually double-coded these posts using a coding framework developed according to the World Health Organization's Confidence, Complacency, and Convenience model of vaccine hesitancy, and conducted engagement analysis to investigate public communication about COVID-19 vaccines on social media.ResultsAmong social media users, 36.4% (571/1568) in New York, 51.3% (738/1440) in London, 67.3% (144/214) in Sao Paulo, 69.8% (726/1040) in Mumbai, and 76.8% (2128/2770) in Beijing indicated that they intended to accept a COVID-19 vaccination. With a high perceived risk of getting COVID-19, more tweeters in New York and London expressed a lack of confidence in vaccine safety, distrust in governments and experts, and widespread misinformation or rumors. Tweeters from Mumbai, Sao Paulo, and Beijing worried more about vaccine production and supply, whereas tweeters from New York and London had more concerns about vaccine distribution and inequity. Negative tweets expressing lack of vaccine confidence and misinformation or rumors had more followers and attracted more public engagement online.ConclusionsCOVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is prevalent worldwide, and negative tweets attract higher engagement on social media. It is urgent to develop an effective vaccine campaign that boosts public confidence and addresses hesitancy for COVID-19 vaccine rollouts.
| S-EPMC8202656 | biostudies-literature