↓ Skip to main content

The construction of confidence in a perceptual decision

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
255 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
272 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The construction of confidence in a perceptual decision
Published in
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnint.2012.00079
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ariel Zylberberg, Pablo Barttfeld, Mariano Sigman

Abstract

Decision-making involves the selection of one out of many possible courses of action. A decision may bear on other decisions, as when humans seek a second medical opinion before undergoing a risky surgical intervention. These "meta-decisions" are mediated by confidence judgments-the degree to which decision-makers consider that a choice is likely to be correct. We studied how subjective confidence is constructed from noisy sensory evidence. The psychophysical kernels used to convert sensory information into choice and confidence decisions were precisely reconstructed measuring the impact of small fluctuations in sensory input. This is shown in two independent experiments in which human participants made a decision about the direction of motion of a set of randomly moving dots, or compared the brightness of a group of fluctuating bars, followed by a confidence report. The results of both experiments converged to show that: (1) confidence was influenced by evidence during a short window of time at the initial moments of the decision, and (2) confidence was influenced by evidence for the selected choice but was virtually blind to evidence for the non-selected choice. Our findings challenge classical models of subjective confidence-which posit that the difference of evidence in favor of each choice is the seed of the confidence signal.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 272 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 1%
France 3 1%
Germany 3 1%
Argentina 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Ghana 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 254 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 73 27%
Researcher 52 19%
Student > Master 36 13%
Student > Bachelor 26 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 5%
Other 42 15%
Unknown 30 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 94 35%
Neuroscience 46 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 38 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 4%
Computer Science 7 3%
Other 34 13%
Unknown 41 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 March 2023.
All research outputs
#2,251,449
of 24,323,543 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#121
of 889 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,893
of 251,945 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#11
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,323,543 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 889 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 251,945 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.