ArticleScientific reports2019
Sustained effects of corrupted feedback on perceptual inference.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Influence of biased feedback on performance in a Vernier discrimination task.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- The Set of Priors Related Concepts Instrumental in Understanding Conscious Perception Begs Clarification.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Feedback is central to most forms of learning, and its reliability is therefore critical. Here, we investigated the effects of corrupted, and hence unreliable, feedback on perceptual inference. Within the framework of Bayesian inference, we hypothesised that corrupting feedback in a demanding perceptual task would compromise sensory information processing and bias inference towards prior information if available. These hypotheses were examined by a simulation and in two behavioural experiments with visual detection (experiment 1) and discrimination (experiment 2) tasks. Both experiments consisted of two sessions comprising intervention runs with either corrupted or uncorrupted (correct) feedback, and pre- and post-intervention tests to assess the effects of feedback. In the tests alone, additional prior beliefs were induced through predictive auditory cues to assess sustained effects of feedback on the balance between sensory evidence and prior beliefs. Both experiments and the simulation showed the hypothesised decrease in performance and increased reliance on prior beliefs after corrupted but not uncorrupted feedback. Exploratory analyses indicated reduced confidence regarding perceptual decisions during delivery of corrupted feedback. Our results suggest that corrupted feedback on perceptual decisions leads to sustained changes in perceptual inference, characterised by a shift from sensory likelihood to prior beliefs when those are accessible.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.