Priors and payoffs are known to affect perceptual decision-making, but little is understood about how they influence confidence judgments. For optimal perceptual decision-making, both priors and payoffs should be considered when selecting a response. However, for confidence to reflect the probability of being correct in a perceptual decision, priors should affect confidence but payoffs should not. To experimentally test whether human observers follow this normative behavior for natural confidence judgments, we conducted an orientation-discrimination task with varied priors and payoffs that probed both perceptual and metacognitive decision-making. The placement of discrimination and confidence criteria were examined according to several plausible Signal Detection Theory models. In the normative model, observers use the optimal discrimination criterion (i.e., the criterion that maximizes expected gain) and confidence criteria that shift with the discrimination criterion that maximizes accuracy (i.e., are not affected by payoffs). No observer was consistent with this model, with the majority exhibiting non-normative confidence behavior. One subset of observers ignored both priors and payoffs for confidence, always fixing the confidence criteria around the neutral discrimination criterion. The other group of observers incorrectly incorporated payoffs into their confidence by always shifting their confidence criteria with the same gains-maximizing criterion used for discrimination. Such metacognitive mistakes could have negative consequences outside the laboratory setting, particularly when priors or payoffs are not matched for all the possible decision alternatives.

中文翻译：

---

信任判断中的先验和收益。

已知先验和收益会影响知觉决策，但人们对它们如何影响信心判断知之甚少。对于最佳感知决策，选择响应时应考虑先验和收益。然而，对于反映感知决策正确概率的置信度，先验应该影响置信度，但收益不应该。为了通过实验测试人类观察者是否遵循这种自然信心判断的规范行为，我们进行了一项具有不同先验和回报的定向辨别任务，探索了感知和元认知决策。根据几个似是而非的信号检测理论模型检查了歧视和置信标准的位置。在规范模型中，观察者使用最佳判别标准（即最大化预期收益的标准）和置信度标准，这些标准随着使准确度最大化的判别标准而变化（即不受收益影响）。没有观察者与该模型一致，大多数人表现出非规范的信心行为。观察者的一个子集忽略了置信度的先验和收益，总是围绕中性歧视标准固定置信度标准。另一组观察者错误地将收益纳入了他们的信心，因为他们总是将他们的信心标准转变为用于歧视的相同收益最大化标准。这种元认知错误可能会在实验室环境之外产生负面影响，