지각적 추정의 변산과 편향이 자신감에 미치는 영향
Effects of behavioral variability and biases on confidence in perceptual estimation
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
인간은 자신이 내린 판단이 가지는 오류를 인식하고, 객관적인 성과에 상응하는 자신감을 가진다. 한편, 인간의 지각적 판단은 편향과 변산, 두 가지 종류의 오류를 가지는 것으로 알려져 있다. 인간이 자신이 내린 판단이 가지는 이 두 가지 종류의 오류를 모두 인지하고 그에 맞추어 자신감을 갖는지는 분명치 않다. 본 연구에서는 중심 집중 효과라고 불리우는 잘 알려진 반응 편향을 이용하여 편향과 변산이 지각적 판단의 자기평가에 어떻게 반영되는지 살펴보았다. 참가자는 타겟 위치를 중심으로 흩어진 점들로부터 보이지 않는 타겟의 위치를 추정해서 응답하고, 그에 대한 주관적 자신감을 보고하였다. 예상대로 참가자들의 타겟 위치에 대한 응답은 여러 시행에 걸쳐 변산을 지녔을 뿐만 아니라 타겟 위치의 분포의 평균으로 편향되었다. 중요하게도, 이러한 편향 때문에 타겟 위치가 타겟 위치 분포의 평균으로부터 떨어져 있을수록 지각 과제 수행 성과가 더 나빴음에도 불구하고, 참가자들의 자신감 보고는 타겟의 위치와 상관없이 일관되게 같은 정도의 자신감을 가졌다. 이러한 결과는 지각적 판단에 대한 메타인지적 자기평가가 반응의 변산은 고려하지만 그 편향은 고려하지 않음을 의미한다.
Abstract
It is generally believed that humans can detect errors in their estimates and maintain a sense of confidence that corresponds to objective performance. Meanwhile, human perceptual estimations tend to commit two types of errors: bias and variability. It remains unclear whether humans can monitor these two distinct kinds of error in their own estimates and adjust levels of confidence accordingly. Using a well-established empirical regularity called the central tendency effect, we examined how behavioral bias and variability are reflected in the self-evaluation of perceptual estimations. Subjects estimated the location of a hidden target from a briefly presented dot-cloud centered on the target location and reported levels of confidence in their estimations. As expected, subjects' perceptual reports were not only variable across trials but also biased toward the mean of the distribution of target locations. Crucially, subjects' confidence reports remained constant regardless of the target location, which is in stark contrast to the fact that the perceptual performance was worse when the target location was farther from the mean of the target location distribution. Our findings indicate that the metacognitive evaluations of perceptual estimations reflect the behavioral variability, but not biases.
참고문헌 (22)
- Bail, C. A., "Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(37), pp.9216~9221 (2018)
- Brainard, D. H., "The psychophysics toolbox", Spatial Vision, 10(4), pp.433~436 (1997)
- Fougnie, D., "Variability in the quality of visual working memory", Nature Communications, 3(1), pp.1~8 (2012)
- Frith, C. D., "The role of metacognition in human social interactions", Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B : Biological Sciences, 367(1599), pp.2213~2223 (2012)
- Harvey, N., "Confidence in judgment", Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 1(2), pp.78~82 (1997)
- Honig, M., "Humans incorporate trial-to-trial working memory uncertainty into rewarded decisions", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(15), pp.8391~8397 (2020)
- Jazayeri, M., "Temporal context calibrates interval timing", Nature Neuroscience, 13(8), pp.1020~1026 (2010)
- Kepecs, A., "Neural correlates, computation and behavioural impact of decision confidence", Nature, 455(7210), pp.227~231 (2008)
- Keysers, C., "Using Bayes factor hypothesis testing in neuroscience to establish evidence of absence", Nature Neuroscience, 23(7), pp.788~799 (2020)
- Körding, K. P., "Bayesian integration in sensorimotor learning", Nature, 427(6971), pp.244~247 (2004)
- Kwon, O. S., "The brain uses adaptive internal models of scene statistics for sensorimotor estimation and planning", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(11), pp.E1064~E1073 (2013)
- Peirce, C. S., "On small differences in sensation", Memoirs of the National Academy of Sciences, 3, pp.73~83 (1885)
- Peters, M. A., "Perceptual confidence neglects decision-incongruent evidence in the brain", Nature Human Behaviour, 1(7), pp.1~8 (2017)
- Pronin, E., "Perception and misperception of bias in human judgment", Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(1), pp.37~43 (2007)
- Pronin, E., "Objectivity in the eye of the beholder : divergent perceptions of bias in self versus others", Psychological Review, 111(3), pp.781~799 (2004)
- Purcell, B. A., "Hierarchical decision processes that operate over distinct timescales underlie choice and changes in strategy", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(31), pp.E4531~E4540 (2016)
- Rouder, J. N., "Default Bayes factors for ANOVA designs", Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 56(5), pp.356~374 (2012)
- van den Berg, R., "Variability in encoding precision accounts for visual short-term memory limitations", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(22), pp.8780~8785 (2012)
- Xiang, Y., "Confidence and central tendency in perceptual judgment", Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 83(7), pp.3024~3034 (2021)
- Yeung, N., "Metacognition in human decision-making : confidence and error monitoring", Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B : Biological Sciences, 367(1594), pp.1310~1321 (2012)
- Zylberberg, A., "Variance misperception explains illusions of confidence in simple perceptual decisions", Consciousness and cognition, 27, pp.246~253 (2014)
- Zylberberg, A., "Counterfactual reasoning underlies the learning of priors in decision making", Neuron, 99(5), pp.1083~1097 (2018)