Optimal metacognitive decision strategies in signal detection theory.

IF 3.2 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Brian Maniscalco, Lucie Charles, Megan A K Peters
{"title":"Optimal metacognitive decision strategies in signal detection theory.","authors":"Brian Maniscalco, Lucie Charles, Megan A K Peters","doi":"10.3758/s13423-024-02510-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Signal detection theory (SDT) has long provided the field of psychology with a simple but powerful model of how observers make decisions under uncertainty. SDT can distinguish sensitivity from response bias and characterize optimal decision strategies. Whereas classical SDT pertains to \"type 1\" judgments about the world, recent work has extended SDT to quantify sensitivity for metacognitive or \"type 2\" judgments about one's own type 1 processing, e.g. confidence ratings. Here we further advance the application of SDT to the study of metacognition by providing a formal account of normative metacognitive decision strategies - i.e., type 2 (confidence) criterion setting - for ideal observers. Optimality is always defined relative to a given objective. We use SDT to derive formulae for optimal type 2 criteria under four distinct objectives: maximizing type 2 accuracy, maximizing type 2 reward, calibrating confidence to accuracy, and maximizing the difference between type 2 hit rate and false alarm rate. Where applicable, we consider these optimization contexts alongside their type 1 counterparts (e.g. maximizing type 1 accuracy) to deepen understanding. We examine the different strategies implied by these formulae and further consider how optimal type 2 criterion setting differs when metacognitive sensitivity deviates from SDT expectation. The theoretical framework provided here can be used to better understand the metacognitive decision strategies of real observers. Possible applications include characterizing observers' spontaneously chosen metacognitive decision strategies, assessing their ability to fine-tune metacognitive decision strategies to optimize a given outcome when instructed, determining over- or under-confidence relative to an optimal standard, and more. This framework opens new avenues for enriching our understanding of metacognition.</p>","PeriodicalId":20763,"journal":{"name":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychonomic Bulletin & Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-024-02510-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Signal detection theory (SDT) has long provided the field of psychology with a simple but powerful model of how observers make decisions under uncertainty. SDT can distinguish sensitivity from response bias and characterize optimal decision strategies. Whereas classical SDT pertains to "type 1" judgments about the world, recent work has extended SDT to quantify sensitivity for metacognitive or "type 2" judgments about one's own type 1 processing, e.g. confidence ratings. Here we further advance the application of SDT to the study of metacognition by providing a formal account of normative metacognitive decision strategies - i.e., type 2 (confidence) criterion setting - for ideal observers. Optimality is always defined relative to a given objective. We use SDT to derive formulae for optimal type 2 criteria under four distinct objectives: maximizing type 2 accuracy, maximizing type 2 reward, calibrating confidence to accuracy, and maximizing the difference between type 2 hit rate and false alarm rate. Where applicable, we consider these optimization contexts alongside their type 1 counterparts (e.g. maximizing type 1 accuracy) to deepen understanding. We examine the different strategies implied by these formulae and further consider how optimal type 2 criterion setting differs when metacognitive sensitivity deviates from SDT expectation. The theoretical framework provided here can be used to better understand the metacognitive decision strategies of real observers. Possible applications include characterizing observers' spontaneously chosen metacognitive decision strategies, assessing their ability to fine-tune metacognitive decision strategies to optimize a given outcome when instructed, determining over- or under-confidence relative to an optimal standard, and more. This framework opens new avenues for enriching our understanding of metacognition.

信号检测理论中的最佳元认知决策策略。
长期以来,信号检测理论(SDT)为心理学领域提供了一个简单而强大的模型,说明观察者如何在不确定情况下做出决策。SDT 可以区分敏感性和反应偏差,并描述最佳决策策略。经典的 SDT 与对世界的 "第一类 "判断有关,而最近的研究则将 SDT 扩展到了量化元认知或 "第二类 "判断的敏感性,即对自身第一类过程的判断,例如置信度评级。在这里,我们通过对理想观察者的规范性元认知决策策略(即第二类(置信度)标准设定)进行正式说明,进一步推动了 SDT 在元认知研究中的应用。最优性总是相对于给定目标而定义的。我们使用 SDT 来推导出四个不同目标下的最佳第二类标准公式:第二类准确性最大化、第二类奖励最大化、信心与准确性校准、第二类命中率与误报率之差最大化。在适用的情况下,我们将这些优化环境与第一类环境(如第一类准确率最大化)一并考虑,以加深理解。我们研究了这些公式所隐含的不同策略,并进一步考虑了当元认知敏感性偏离 SDT 预期时,最佳类型 2 标准设置有何不同。本文提供的理论框架可用于更好地理解真实观察者的元认知决策策略。可能的应用包括描述观察者自发选择的元认知决策策略的特征,评估观察者微调元认知决策策略的能力,以便在接受指导时优化给定结果,确定相对于最优标准的过度自信或不足自信,等等。这一框架为丰富我们对元认知的理解开辟了新的途径。
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
6.70
自引率
2.90%
发文量
165
期刊介绍: The journal provides coverage spanning a broad spectrum of topics in all areas of experimental psychology. The journal is primarily dedicated to the publication of theory and review articles and brief reports of outstanding experimental work. Areas of coverage include cognitive psychology broadly construed, including but not limited to action, perception, & attention, language, learning & memory, reasoning & decision making, and social cognition. We welcome submissions that approach these issues from a variety of perspectives such as behavioral measurements, comparative psychology, development, evolutionary psychology, genetics, neuroscience, and quantitative/computational modeling. We particularly encourage integrative research that crosses traditional content and methodological boundaries.
×
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