Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28646672›Full record

ArticleCortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior2017

Transcranial magnetic stimulation to visual cortex induces suboptimal introspection.

Megan A K Peters, Jeremy Fesi, Namema Amendi, Jeffrey D Knotts, Hakwan Lau, Tony Ro

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Unconscious Perception of Vernier Offsets.Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Sources of Metacognitive Inefficiency.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2021
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Humans incorporate attention-dependent uncertainty into perceptual decisions and confidence.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018
    Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Megan A K PetersDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA. Electronic address: meganakpeters@ucla.edu.
Jeremy FesiPrograms in Psychology and Biology, The Graduate Center of the City University of New York, New York, NY, USA.
Namema AmendiPrograms in Psychology and Biology, The Graduate Center of the City University of New York, New York, NY, USA.
Jeffrey D KnottsDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Hakwan LauDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Brain Research Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Tony RoPrograms in Psychology and Biology, The Graduate Center of the City University of New York, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

Neural basis of metacognitionR01NS088628 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI FLEMING, STEPHEN MICHAEL, LAU, HAKWAN · 2014 to 2018
$1.7M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS088628
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Blindsight patients with damage to the visual cortex can discriminate objects but report no conscious visual experience. This provides an intriguing opportunity to allow the study of subjective awareness in isolation from objective performance capacity. However, blindsight is rare, so one promising way to induce the effect in neurologically intact observers is to apply transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to the visual cortex. Here, we used a recently-developed criterion-free method to conclusively rule out an important alternative interpretation of TMS-induced performance without awareness: that TMS-induced blindsight may be just due to conservative reporting biases for conscious perception. Critically, using this criterion-free paradigm we have previously shown that introspective judgments were optimal even under visual masking. However, here under TMS, observers were suboptimal, as if they were metacognitively blind to the visual disturbances caused by TMS. We argue that metacognitive judgments depend on observers' internal statistical models of their own perceptual systems, and introspective suboptimality arises when external perturbations abruptly make those models invalid - a phenomenon that may also be happening in actual blindsight.

Indexed as

Transcranial Magnetic StimulationAdultAwarenessConsciousnessFemaleHumansMalePhotic StimulationVisual CortexVisual PerceptionBayesian ideal observerBlindsightMetacognitionNoninvasive neuromodulationUnconscious perception

Identifiers

PMID28646672
PMCPMC5541901

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.