Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34310613›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2021

Explaining distortions in metacognition with an attractor network model of decision uncertainty.

Nadim A A Atiya, Quentin J M Huys, Raymond J Dolan, Stephen M Fleming

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nadim A A AtiyaMax Planck University College London Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing Research, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-5586-5584
Quentin J M HuysMax Planck University College London Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing Research, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Raymond J DolanMax Planck University College London Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing Research, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Stephen M FlemingMax Planck University College London Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing Research, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0233-4891
Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging · GBUniversity College London · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust 206648/Z/17/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Metacognition is the ability to reflect on, and evaluate, our cognition and behaviour. Distortions in metacognition are common in mental health disorders, though the neural underpinnings of such dysfunction are unknown. One reason for this is that models of key components of metacognition, such as decision confidence, are generally specified at an algorithmic or process level. While such models can be used to relate brain function to psychopathology, they are difficult to map to a neurobiological mechanism. Here, we develop a biologically-plausible model of decision uncertainty in an attempt to bridge this gap. We first relate the model's uncertainty in perceptual decisions to standard metrics of metacognition, namely mean confidence level (bias) and the accuracy of metacognitive judgments (sensitivity). We show that dissociable shifts in metacognition are associated with isolated disturbances at higher-order levels of a circuit associated with self-monitoring, akin to neuropsychological findings that highlight the detrimental effect of prefrontal brain lesions on metacognitive performance. Notably, we are able to account for empirical confidence judgements by fitting the parameters of our biophysical model to first-order performance data, specifically choice and response times. Lastly, in a reanalysis of existing data we show that self-reported mental health symptoms relate to disturbances in an uncertainty-monitoring component of the network. By bridging a gap between a biologically-plausible model of confidence formation and observed disturbances of metacognition in mental health disorders we provide a first step towards mapping theoretical constructs of metacognition onto dynamical models of decision uncertainty. In doing so, we provide a computational framework for modelling metacognitive performance in settings where access to explicit confidence reports is not possible.

Indexed as

Models, PsychologicalNeural Networks, ComputerBiasComputational BiologyDecision MakingHumansJudgmentLinear ModelsMental DisordersMetacognitionModels, NeurologicalPsychomotor PerformanceUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID34310613
PMCPMC8341696
OpenAlexW3185830025

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.