Subjective and objective approaches in the study of conscious perception
PsyArXiv Preprints September 7, 2026 preprint DOI: osf:2pk5j_v3 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper |
|---|---|
| Keywords | 1afc 2afc Appearance Consciousness Criterion-dependent Criterion-free Detection Discrimination Metacognition Nonforced-choice Objective Perceptual awareness scale Performance Post-hoc sorting Subjective Type 1 responses Type 2 responses Cognitive neuroscience Perception Vision Cognitive psychology |
| Key points | Argues that the objective-subjective distinction in consciousness research is not clearly defined and applies to multiple dimensions beyond the measure itself, including method, stimulus presentation, response type, and ground truth. Proposes that researchers should explicitly outline their choices on these dichotomies and justify claims of capturing 'consciousness'. |
Abstract
Science uses objective measurements to falsify predictions, whereas consciousness is thought to be intrinsically personal and subjective. Consequently, behavioral measures of consciousness are often designated as “objective” or “subjective”. Surprisingly however, the exact meaning of the terms objective and subjective is not clearly defined. Moreover, applying this label to a given behavioral measure is misleading, as the same measure can often be analyzed within a “subjective” or “objective” framework. Thus, the terms objective and subjective are not only relevant to the measure that is used, but to several other dimensions as well. In this chapter we provide a brief overview of dichotomies along which one might conceptualize the objective-subjective distinction, such as the empirico-analytical method (manipulation vs trial-by-trial sorting), the mode of stimulus presentation (forced-choice vs nonforced-choice), the response type (Type 1 vs Type 2), and the adoption of a ground truth when computing the outcome measure (performance vs appearance). Although these dichotomies often overlap, the correspondence between them is only partial. Problems and pitfalls are discussed. Finally, we recommend to always explicitly outline how one’s stimulus presentation, task, response measure, and analysis approach score on these dichotomies, requiring further explicit justification when claiming to capture “consciousness” as a construct.