ABSTRACT

Visibility and confidence are two subtly (sensation-based and intuition-based) different ways to assess our visual experiences. We investigated how different choice sets affect the ability of confidence and visibility judgments to retrieve conscious information from perceptual decision-making processes. Six participants made introspective judgments on sinusoidal gratings at close to chance signal-to-noise values. We used signal detection theory and mixed regression models to analyze choices and pupilometric recordings. The results suggest that allowing null responses (e.g., “I saw nothing”) asymmetrically affects the signal distribution variances associated with null and non-null responses; confidence is more effective than visibility in accessing unconscious information; and bias-free methods hinder accurate introspective judgment by forbidding free decision criteria. Our findings underscore the importance of the context afforded by choice and stimulus sets, which determines the extent to which elicited introspective judgments are based on the actual information from the past events they are intended to measure.

摘要

可见性和信心是评估我们视觉体验的两种微妙（基于感觉和基于直觉）的不同方式。我们调查了不同的选择集如何影响信心和可见性判断从感知决策过程中检索有意识信息的能力。六名参与者以接近偶然的信噪比值对正弦光栅做出内省判断。我们使用信号检测理论和混合回归模型来分析选择和瞳孔测量记录。结果表明，允许空响应（例如，“我什么都没看到”）不对称地影响与空响应和非空响应相关的信号分布方差。在获取无意识信息方面，自信比可见性更有效；无偏见方法通过禁止自由决策标准来阻碍准确的内省判断。我们的研究结果强调了选择和刺激集所提供的背景的重要性，这决定了引发的内省判断在多大程度上是基于他们打算衡量的过去事件的实际信息。