IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1007456.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The folded X-pattern is not necessarily a statistical signature of decision confidence

Author

Listed:
  • Manuel Rausch
  • Michael Zehetleitner

Abstract

Recent studies have traced the neural correlates of confidence in perceptual choices using statistical signatures of confidence. The most widely used statistical signature is the folded X-pattern, which was derived from a standard model of confidence assuming an objective definition of confidence as the posterior probability of making the correct choice given the evidence. The folded X-pattern entails that confidence as the subjective probability of being correct equals the probability of 0.75 if the stimulus in neutral about the choice options, increases with discriminability of the stimulus in correct trials, and decreases with discriminability in incorrect trials. Here, we show that the standard model of confidence is a special case in which there is no reliable trial-by-trial evidence about discriminability itself. According to a more general model, if there is enough evidence about discriminability, objective confidence is characterised by different pattern: For both correct and incorrect choices, confidence increases with discriminability. In addition, we demonstrate the consequence if discriminability is varied in discrete steps within the standard model: confidence in choices about neutral stimuli is no longer .75. Overall, identifying neural correlates of confidence by presupposing the folded X-pattern as a statistical signature of confidence is not legitimate.Author summary: Confidence in perceptual choices is a degree of belief that a choice about a stimulus is correct. To identify the neural correlates of decision confidence, recent studies have widely used statistical signatures of confidence. The most widely used statistical signature is the folded X-pattern, which entails that the subjective probability of being correct is 0.75 when the stimulus is neutral about the choice, increases with discriminability in correct trials, and decreases with discriminability in incorrect trials. Here, we examine the consequences if key assumptions of the folded X-pattern are violated. If decision makers are provided with evidence about discriminability, objective confidence increases with discriminability for correct and incorrect choices. In addition, if discriminability is varied in discrete levels, confidence in choices about neutral stimuli is not 0.75. Overall, this means that researchers should not search for correlates of confidence by assuming the folded X-pattern as signature of confidence a priori.

Suggested Citation

  • Manuel Rausch & Michael Zehetleitner, 2019. "The folded X-pattern is not necessarily a statistical signature of decision confidence," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-18, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1007456
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007456
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007456
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007456&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007456?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anne E. Urai & Anke Braun & Tobias H. Donner, 2017. "Pupil-linked arousal is driven by decision uncertainty and alters serial choice bias," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 8(1), pages 1-11, April.
    2. Laurence Aitchison & Dan Bang & Bahador Bahrami & Peter E Latham, 2015. "Doubly Bayesian Analysis of Confidence in Perceptual Decision-Making," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-23, October.
    3. Joaquin Navajas & Chandni Hindocha & Hebah Foda & Mehdi Keramati & Peter E. Latham & Bahador Bahrami, 2017. "The idiosyncratic nature of confidence," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(11), pages 810-818, November.
    4. Megan A. K. Peters & Thomas Thesen & Yoshiaki D. Ko & Brian Maniscalco & Chad Carlson & Matt Davidson & Werner Doyle & Ruben Kuzniecky & Orrin Devinsky & Eric Halgren & Hakwan Lau, 2017. "Perceptual confidence neglects decision-incongruent evidence in the brain," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(7), pages 1-8, July.
    5. Annika Boldt & Vincent de Gardelle & Nick Yeung, 2017. "The impact of evidence reliability on sensitivity and bias in decision confidence," Post-Print hal-01659634, HAL.
    6. Arbora Resulaj & Roozbeh Kiani & Daniel M. Wolpert & Michael N. Shadlen, 2009. "Changes of mind in decision-making," Nature, Nature, vol. 461(7261), pages 263-266, September.
    7. Adam Kepecs & Naoshige Uchida & Hatim A. Zariwala & Zachary F. Mainen, 2008. "Neural correlates, computation and behavioural impact of decision confidence," Nature, Nature, vol. 455(7210), pages 227-231, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:hal:pseptp:hal-03329211 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:hal:journl:hal-03329211 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:hal:cesptp:hal-03329211 is not listed on IDEAS

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. William T Adler & Wei Ji Ma, 2018. "Comparing Bayesian and non-Bayesian accounts of human confidence reports," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-34, November.
    2. Micha Heilbron & Florent Meyniel, 2019. "Confidence resets reveal hierarchical adaptive learning in humans," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-24, April.
    3. Andrea Insabato & Mario Pannunzi & Gustavo Deco, 2017. "Multiple Choice Neurodynamical Model of the Uncertain Option Task," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-29, January.
    4. Florent Meyniel, 2020. "Brain dynamics for confidence-weighted learning," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-27, June.
    5. Marina Martinez-Garcia & Andrea Insabato & Mario Pannunzi & Jose L Pardo-Vazquez & Carlos Acuña & Gustavo Deco, 2015. "The Encoding of Decision Difficulty and Movement Time in the Primate Premotor Cortex," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-25, November.
    6. Kobe Desender & Luc Vermeylen & Tom Verguts, 2022. "Dynamic influences on static measures of metacognition," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, December.
    7. Sebastian Bitzer & Jelle Bruineberg & Stefan J Kiebel, 2015. "A Bayesian Attractor Model for Perceptual Decision Making," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(8), pages 1-35, August.
    8. Zohar Z Bronfman & Noam Brezis & Marius Usher, 2016. "Non-monotonic Temporal-Weighting Indicates a Dynamically Modulated Evidence-Integration Mechanism," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21, February.
    9. Leopold Zizlsperger & Thomas Sauvigny & Thomas Haarmeier, 2012. "Selective Attention Increases Choice Certainty in Human Decision Making," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(7), pages 1-9, July.
    10. Marine Hainguerlot & Thibault Gajdos & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud & Vincent de Gardelle, 2023. "How Overconfidence Bias Influences Suboptimality in Perceptual Decision Making," PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint) hal-04197403, HAL.
    11. Adrian M Haith & David M Huberdeau & John W Krakauer, 2015. "Hedging Your Bets: Intermediate Movements as Optimal Behavior in the Context of an Incomplete Decision," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-21, March.
    12. Lejarraga, Tomás & Lejarraga, José, 2020. "Confidence and the description–experience distinction," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 201-212.
    13. Laurence Aitchison & Dan Bang & Bahador Bahrami & Peter E Latham, 2015. "Doubly Bayesian Analysis of Confidence in Perceptual Decision-Making," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-23, October.
    14. Ronald H Stevens & Trysha L Galloway, 2022. "Can machine learning be used to forecast the future uncertainty of military teams?," The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation, , vol. 19(2), pages 145-158, April.
    15. Wan-Yu Shih & Hsiang-Yu Yu & Cheng-Chia Lee & Chien-Chen Chou & Chien Chen & Paul W. Glimcher & Shih-Wei Wu, 2023. "Electrophysiological population dynamics reveal context dependencies during decision making in human frontal cortex," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-24, December.
    16. Johannes Rüter & Henning Sprekeler & Wulfram Gerstner & Michael H Herzog, 2013. "The Silent Period of Evidence Integration in Fast Decision Making," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(1), pages 1-7, January.
    17. Marine Hainguerlot & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud & Vincent de Gardelle, 2018. "Metacognitive ability predicts learning cue-stimulus associations in the absence of external feedback," PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint) hal-01761531, HAL.
    18. Dobromir Rahnev & Kobe Desender & Alan L. F. Lee & William T. Adler & David Aguilar-Lleyda & Başak Akdoğan & Polina Arbuzova & Lauren Y. Atlas & Fuat Balcı & Ji Won Bang & Indrit Bègue & Damian P. Bir, 2020. "The Confidence Database," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(3), pages 317-325, March.
    19. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:5:p:527-539 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Charles-Cadogan, G., 2021. "Market Instability, Investor Sentiment, And Probability Judgment Error in Index Option Prices," CRETA Online Discussion Paper Series 71, Centre for Research in Economic Theory and its Applications CRETA.
    21. J. Tyler Boyd-Meredith & Alex T. Piet & Emily Jane Dennis & Ahmed El Hady & Carlos D. Brody, 2022. "Stable choice coding in rat frontal orienting fields across model-predicted changes of mind," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1007456. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.