ArticleBehavior research methods2023
Confidence judgments are associated with face identification accuracy: Findings from a confidence forced-choice task.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Impact of Item Difficulty on Judgment of Confidence-A Cross-Level Moderated Mediation Model.Journal of Intelligence · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Confidence is assumed to be an indicator of identification accuracy in legal practices (e.g., forensic face examination). However, it is not clear whether people can evaluate the correctness of their face-identification decisions reliably using confidence reports. In the current experiment, confidence in the correctness of the perceptual decision was measured with a confidence forced-choice methodology: Upon completion of two perceptual face-identity matching trials, the participants were asked to compare the two decisions and to select the trial on which they felt more confident. On each face-identity matching trial, participants viewed three face images (two same-identity images, one different-identity image) and were instructed to select the image of the different identity. In order to measure the extent to which difficulty level informs confidence decisions, we selected face-image triads using item-difficulty estimates extracted from psychometric modeling applied in a prior study. The difference in difficulty between the paired face-image triads predicted the proportion of high-confidence judgments allocated to the easier trial of the pair. Consistent with the impact of difficulty monitoring on confidence judgments, performance was significantly more accurate on trials associated with higher confidence. Overall, the results suggested that people reliably evaluate the correctness of their perceptual face-identity matching decisions and use trial difficulty to evaluate confidence.
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.