Metacognitive Efficiency Reduces Confirmation Bias in Perceptual Decision Making

Abstract

Humans exhibit a pervasive drive toward self-consistency, often failing to revise previous decisions even when confronted with contradictory evidence. Here, we investigate the computational mechanisms underlying decision revision in perceptual tasks, examining the regulatory role of metacognition. To do so, we capitalize on a novel paradigm in which participants are repeatedly presented with identical sensory information and allowed to revise their choices after each exposure. Our results reveal that repeated exposure to the same stimulus systematically biases subsequent judgments toward prior responses. Using drift-diffusion modeling, we tested competing explanations incorporating different assumptions about how prior choices affect evidence accumulation. Our findings indicate that consistency biases emerge from asymmetric sensory weighting, selectively amplifying information consistent with previous choices--a phenomenon akin to confirmation bias. Crucially, individuals with higher metacognitive skills exhibited weaker confirmatory biases and more flexible integration of repeated sensory information, enabling greater adaptability in decision-making. These findings highlight the continuous nature of perceptual inference and underscore metacognitions pivotal role in mitigating bias and optimizing decision flexibility.