ArticleScientific reports2019
Temporal attention causes systematic biases in visual confidence.
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 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measuring individual differences in the speed of attention using the distractor intrusion task.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Spatial attention selectively alters visual cortical representation during target anticipation.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Attention and feature binding in the temporal domain.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2024Article
- Transient Attention Gates Access Consciousness: Coupling N2pc and P3 Latencies Using Dynamic Time Warping.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024Article
- Consensus Goals in the Field of Visual Metacognition.Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2022Article
- Alpha oscillations and stimulus-evoked activity dissociate metacognitive reports of attention, visibility, and confidence in a rapid visual detection task.Journal of vision · 2022Article
- Modelling the simultaneous encoding/serial experience theory of the perceptual moment: a blink of meta-experience.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2022Article
- Confidence at the limits of human nested cognition.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2022Article
- How does positive mood modulate time-based event expectancy?Cognitive processing · 2021Article
- A robust confidence-accuracy dissociation via criterion attraction.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2021Article
- Resilience of perceptual metacognition in a dual-task paradigm.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Temporal attention enhances the perceptual representation of a stimulus at a particular point in time. The number of possible attentional episodes in a given period is limited, but whether observers' confidence reflects such limitations is still unclear. To investigate this issue, we adapted an "Attentional Blink" paradigm, presenting observers with a rapid visual stream of letters containing two targets cued for subsequent perceptual reports and confidence judgments. We found three main results. First, when two targets fell within the same attentional episode, the second target underwent a strong under-confidence bias. In other words, confidence neglected that a single attentional episode can benefit to both targets. Second, despite this initial bias, confidence was strongly correlated with response probability. Third, as confidence was yoked to the evidence used in perceptual reports, it remains blind to delays in response selection for the second target. Notably, the second target was often mistaken with a later item associated with higher confidence. These results suggest that confidence does not perfectly evaluate the limits of temporal attention in challenging situations.
Indexed as
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.