Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31073187›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Confidence as a diagnostic tool for perceptual aftereffects.

Regan M Gallagher, Thomas Suddendorf, Derek H Arnold

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Negative affect interacts with perceptual affective biases.Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England) · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. An entropy model of decision uncertainty.Journal of mathematical psychology · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Predictions and rewards affect decision-making but not subjective experience.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Regan M GallagherSchool of Psychology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. regan.gallagher@uqconnect.edu.au.
Thomas SuddendorfSchool of Psychology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Derek H ArnoldSchool of Psychology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Perceptual judgements are, by nature, a product both of sensation and the cognitive processes responsible for interpreting and reporting subjective experiences. Changed perceptual judgements may thus result from changes in how the world appears (perception), or subsequent interpretation (judgement). This ambiguity has led to persistent debates about how to interpret changes in decision-making, and if higher-order cognitions can change how the world looks, or sounds, or feels. Here we introduce an approach that can help resolve these ambiguities. In three motion-direction experiments, we measured perceptual judgements and subjective confidence. We show that each measure is sensitive to sensory information and can index sensory adaptation. Each measure is also sensitive to decision biases, but response bias impacts the central tendency of decision and confidence distributions differently. Our findings show that subjective confidence, when measured in addition to perceptual decisions, can supply important diagnostic information about the cause of aftereffects.

Indexed as

Decision MakingFemaleHumansJudgmentMaleNeuropsychological TestsPerception

Identifiers

PMID31073187
PMCPMC6509108

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.