Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMazor, M
dc.contributor.authorMoran, R
dc.contributor.authorFleming, SM
dc.date.accessioned2023-12-20T10:05:05Z
dc.date.available2021-08-10
dc.date.available2023-12-20T10:05:05Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.urihttps://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/handle/123456789/93138
dc.description.abstractRepresenting the absence of objects is psychologically demanding. People are slower, less confident and show lower metacognitive sensitivity (the alignment between subjective confidence and objective accuracy) when reporting the absence compared with presence of visual stimuli. However, what counts as a stimulus absence remains only loosely defined. In this Registered Report, we ask whether such processing asymmetries extend beyond the absence of whole objects to absences defined by stimulus features or expectation violations. Our pre-registered prediction was that differences in the processing of presence and absence reflect a default mode of reasoning: we assume an absence unless evidence is available to the contrary. We predicted asymmetries in response time, confidence, and metacognitive sensitivity in discriminating between stimulus categories that vary in the presence or absence of a distinguishing feature, or in their compliance with an expected default state. Using six pairs of stimuli in six experiments, we find evidence that the absence of local and global stimulus features gives rise to slower, less confident responses, similar to absences of entire stimuli. Contrary to our hypothesis, however, the presence or absence of a local feature has no effect on metacognitive sensitivity. Our results weigh against a proposal of a link between the detection metacognitive asymmetry and default reasoning, and are instead consistent with a low-level visual origin of metacognitive asymmetries for presence and absence.en_US
dc.format.extentniab025 - ?
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherOxford University Pressen_US
dc.relation.ispartofNeurosci Conscious
dc.rightsThis is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
dc.rightsAttribution 3.0 United States*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/*
dc.subjectabsenceen_US
dc.subjectmetacognitionen_US
dc.subjectpresenceen_US
dc.titleMetacognitive asymmetries in visual perception.en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.holder© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press.
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/nc/niab025
pubs.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34676104en_US
pubs.issue2en_US
pubs.notesNot knownen_US
pubs.publication-statusPublished onlineen_US
pubs.volume2021en_US
dcterms.dateAccepted2021-08-10
rioxxterms.funderDefault funderen_US
rioxxterms.identifier.projectDefault projecten_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.