ISSN 0439-755X
CN 11-1911/B
主办:中国心理学会
   中国科学院心理研究所
出版:科学出版社

心理学报 ›› 2026, Vol. 58 ›› Issue (2): 336-349.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2026.0336 cstr: 32110.14.2026.0336

• 研究报告 • 上一篇    下一篇

无效预期诱发知觉偏差却提升元认知判断准确性

罗铁勇, 刘翠珍   

  1. 陕西师范大学心理学院, 西安 710062
  • 收稿日期:2025-01-16 发布日期:2025-12-03 出版日期:2026-02-25
  • 通讯作者: 刘翠珍, E-mail: liucuizhen@snnu.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金青年项目(32300934)、西安市科协青年人才托举计划项目(959202313049)资助

Invalid expectations induce perceptual bias yet enhance the accuracy of metacognitive judgments

LUO Tieyong, LIU Cuizhen   

  1. School of Psychology, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an 710065, China
  • Received:2025-01-16 Online:2025-12-03 Published:2026-02-25

摘要: 人类生活在一个充满不确定性的世界中, 为了能够及时响应和处理周围信息的变化, 大脑会持续对周围环境产生预期。这些预期能够引导我们的感知和行动, 然而, 不成熟的预测也可能导致决策偏差。本研究通过5个实验探讨无效预期如何影响知觉判断及其后的信心估计。实验1、实验2和实验3分别探究了无效预期在高、中、低三种不同任务难度下对知觉判断和信心估计的影响。实验4引入无预测的基线条件以提供对照, 实验5通过分离预测和知觉判断的按键设置, 排除动作效应的干扰。4个实验均发现(实验3除外), 被试倾向于将知觉刺激判断为与预测一致, 这表明无效预期引起了知觉偏差。在元认知效率(即信心估计的准确性)上, 5个实验一致发现, 被试在匹配试次(预测刺激与知觉判断一致)中的表现显著优于不匹配试次, 表现出更高的元认知水平。综上, 无效预期虽然影响了初级的知觉判断导致了知觉偏差, 但却促进了更高级的元认知心理加工。

关键词: 无效预期, 知觉判断, 自信心, 元认知

Abstract: Humans live in a world filled with uncertainty. To adapt to and process changes in their surroundings, the brain continuously generates predictions about the environment. Predictions can guide perception and action. However, given the ambiguous and highly unpredictable nature of the external world, individuals often lack sufficient information to form accurate predictions. This study investigates how non-informative prediction, specifically invalid prediction, shapes perceptual judgments and subsequent confidence estimates through five experiments.
In a face/house judgment task, participants were required to determine whether a presented blurry image depicted a face or a house, and then rate their confidence in that perceptual judgment. Before the image was displayed, participants predicted the category of the upcoming image (face or house). Experiment 1 (n = 38, perceptual accuracy ≈ 64%), Experiment 2 (n = 44, perceptual accuracy ≈ 75%) and Experiment 3 (n = 47, perceptual accuracy ≈ 85%) systematically manipulated task difficulty to examine how non-informative predictions modulate perceptual judgments and confidence ratings. Experiment 4 (n = 41) introduced a condition without predictions to provide a baseline for evaluating the predictive effects. In Experiment 5 (n = 40), the response keys for predictions and perceptual judgments were separated to eliminate potential action-related effects.
The results revealed that: (1) non-informative predictions induced perceptual biases under high and moderate task difficulty conditions (except in Experiment 3 with low difficulty), systematically biasing individuals to align their perceptual judgments with prior predictions; (2) non-informative predictions affected subjective confidence, as participants reported higher confidence in trials where their perceptions aligned with their predictions compared to trials where they did not; and (3) non-informative predictions enhanced the accuracy of metacognitive judgments, with individuals exhibiting greater metacognitive efficiency when their perceptual judgments matched predictions compared to mismatched trials.
In summary, while non-informative prediction induces perceptual biases, it enhances metacognitive judgments. These findings highlight the distinct effects of non-informative predictions on perceptual judgments and metacognitive functions. The study contributes to a deeper understanding of the interplay among expectations, perception, and metacognition. Finally, it offers practical implications for optimizing cognitive decision-making and improving metacognitive accuracy.

Key words: non-informative prediction, perceptual judgment, confidence, metacognition

中图分类号: