Visibility is not equivalent to confidence in a low contrast orientation discrimination task
Manuel eRausch, Michael eZehetleitner
Frontiers in Psychology July 4, 2016 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00591 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Experimental study Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Keywords | Consciousness Visual awareness Confidence Metacognition Signal detection theory Visibility |
| Key findings | Participants used more liberal criteria for confidence reports than for visibility reports. Confidence reports predicted accuracy better than visibility reports, but only visibility reports tracked stimulus contrast on incorrect trials. The authors argue this distinction aligns with partial awareness and higher order thought theories. |
Abstract
In several visual tasks, participants report that they feel confident about discrimination responses at a level of stimulation at which they would report not seeing the stimulus. How general and reliable is this effect? We compared subjective reports of discrimination confidence and subjective reports of visibility in an orientation discrimination task with varying stimulus contrast. Participants applied more liberal criteria for subjective reports of discrimination confidence than for visibility. While reports of discrimination confidence were more efficient in predicting trial accuracy than reports of visibility, only reports of visibility but not confidence were associated with stimulus contrast in incorrect trials. It is argued that the distinction between discrimination confidence and visibility can be reconciled with both the partial awareness hypothesis and higher order thought theory. We suggest that consciousness research would benefit from differentiating between subjective reports of visibility and confidence.