Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42245996›Full record

ArticleOpen mind : discoveries in cognitive science2026

Response Time as a Proxy for Decision Confidence: Insights From Type-2 ROC Analysis.

Kiyofumi Miyoshi, Dobromir Rahnev, Hakwan Lau

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Kiyofumi MiyoshiGraduate School of Informatics, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6549-9928
Dobromir RahnevSchool of Psychology, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Hakwan LauCenter for Neuroscience Imaging Research, Institute for Basic Science, Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon, South Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study explores the use of response time (RT) data in type-2 receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, a method traditionally used to examine the relationship between confidence and response correctness. Analyses of 16 perceptual decision-making datasets revealed that: (1) RT data contains roughly two-thirds as much information about response correctness as confidence; (2) RT carries unique predictive power for response correctness, independent of confidence; (3) RT and confidence interact synergistically, with confidence becoming a stronger predictor of response correctness when RT is short; (4) Despite these unique properties of RT, type-2 sensitivity (meta-d') derived from RT and confidence showed a reasonably high correlation across subjects. These findings carry two key implications. First, in the absence of confidence data, RT can serve as a viable proxy, incurring minimal cognitive and logistical costs. This makes type-2 analysis feasible across various settings, potentially including infant and animal studies. Second, when both RT and confidence data are available, their combined use in type-2 analysis offers complementary insights into the processes underlying subjects' behavior. To illustrate this, we present a simulation showing how the observed behavioral patterns align with the two-stage dynamic signal detection model. We propose that RT-based type-2 analysis is a valuable tool for researchers, helping to uncover previously underexplored aspects of decision-making behavior.

Indexed as

confidencemetacognitionperceptual decision-makingreceiver operating characteristic (ROC)response timesignal detection theory

Identifiers

PMID42245996
PMCPMC13233096

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.