Consciousness Under the Spotlight: The Problem of Measuring Subjective Experience.

IF 3.2 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews-Cognitive Science Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-24 DOI:10.1002/wcs.1697
Mikel Jimenez, Antonio Prieto, José Antonio Hinojosa, Pedro R Montoro
{"title":"Consciousness Under the Spotlight: The Problem of Measuring Subjective Experience.","authors":"Mikel Jimenez, Antonio Prieto, José Antonio Hinojosa, Pedro R Montoro","doi":"10.1002/wcs.1697","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The study of consciousness is considered by many one of the most difficult contemporary scientific endeavors and confronts several methodological and theoretical challenges. A central issue that makes the study of consciousness so challenging is that, while the rest of science is concerned with problems that can be verified from a \"third person\" view (i.e., objectively), the study of consciousness deals with the phenomenon of subjective experience, only accessible from a \"first person\" view. In the present article, we review early (starting during the late 19th century) and later efforts on measuring consciousness and its absence, focusing on the two main approaches used by researchers within the field: objective (i.e., performance based) and subjective (i.e., report based) measures of awareness. In addition, we compare the advantages and disadvantages of both types of awareness measures, evaluate them according to different methodological considerations, and discuss, among other issues, the possibility of comparing them by transforming them to a common sensitivity measure (d'). Finally, we explore several new approaches-such as Bayesian models to support the absence of awareness or new machine-learning based decoding models-as well as future challenges-such as measuring the qualia, the qualitative contents of awareness-in consciousness research.</p>","PeriodicalId":47720,"journal":{"name":"Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews-Cognitive Science","volume":" ","pages":"e1697"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews-Cognitive Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1697","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The study of consciousness is considered by many one of the most difficult contemporary scientific endeavors and confronts several methodological and theoretical challenges. A central issue that makes the study of consciousness so challenging is that, while the rest of science is concerned with problems that can be verified from a "third person" view (i.e., objectively), the study of consciousness deals with the phenomenon of subjective experience, only accessible from a "first person" view. In the present article, we review early (starting during the late 19th century) and later efforts on measuring consciousness and its absence, focusing on the two main approaches used by researchers within the field: objective (i.e., performance based) and subjective (i.e., report based) measures of awareness. In addition, we compare the advantages and disadvantages of both types of awareness measures, evaluate them according to different methodological considerations, and discuss, among other issues, the possibility of comparing them by transforming them to a common sensitivity measure (d'). Finally, we explore several new approaches-such as Bayesian models to support the absence of awareness or new machine-learning based decoding models-as well as future challenges-such as measuring the qualia, the qualitative contents of awareness-in consciousness research.

聚光灯下的意识:主观经验的测量问题。
许多人认为,意识研究是当代最困难的科学研究之一,面临着方法论和理论上的诸多挑战。使意识研究如此具有挑战性的一个核心问题是,其他科学所关注的问题都可以从 "第三人称 "视角(即客观视角)进行验证,而意识研究涉及的是主观体验现象,只能从 "第一人称 "视角进行验证。在本文中,我们回顾了早期(始于 19 世纪晚期)和后来测量意识及其缺失的工作,重点是该领域研究人员使用的两种主要方法:客观(即基于表现)和主观(即基于报告)的意识测量方法。此外,我们还比较了这两种意识测量方法的优缺点,根据不同的方法论考虑因素对它们进行了评估,并讨论了通过将它们转换为共同的灵敏度测量(d')对它们进行比较的可能性等问题。最后,我们探讨了几种新方法--如支持无意识的贝叶斯模型或基于机器学习的新解码模型--以及未来的挑战--如测量意识的定性内容--。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
50
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信