Peripheral overconfidence in a scene categorization task.

Our ability to detect and discriminate stimuli differs across the visual field. Does metaperception (i.e., visual confidence) follow these differences? Evidence is mixed, as studies have reported overconfidence in peripheral detection tasks and underconfidence in a peripheral local orientation discrimination task. Here, we tested whether overconfidence can arise in a task that aligns with the strengths of peripheral vision: rapid scene categorization. In each interval, our participants viewed a scene only in the periphery (scotoma) or only in the center (window) and categorized it (desert, beach, mountain, or forest). Subsequently, they indicated the interval for which they were more confident in their judgment. Task difficulty was manipulated by varying the scotoma and window size. Accuracy decreased with the increasing size of the scotoma and increased with the increasing size of the window. We computed the probability of higher confidence in the periphery as a function of the expected performance difference between the two conditions. Participants' points of equal confidence were systematically shifted toward higher central perceptual performance, indicating that higher visibility in the center was needed to produce matched perceptual confidence and demonstrating overconfidence in the periphery. This suggests that changing the task from local orientation discrimination to global scene categorization (i.e., a task where peripheral vision outperforms foveal vision) reversed the metaperceptual bias. Periphery is suited for detecting objects and processing global information, but not for discriminating fine details or local features. Metacognitive judgments seem to follow these inherent capabilities and constraints of peripheral vision.