Measuring consciousness

is one measure better than the other?

Kristian Sandberg, Bert Timmermans, Morten Overgaard, Axel Cleeremans

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

203 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

What is the best way of assessing the extent to which people are aware of a stimulus? Here, using a masked visual identification task, we compared three measures of subjective awareness: The Perceptual Awareness Scale (PAS), through which participants are asked to rate the clarity of their visual experience; confidence ratings (CR), through which participants express their confidence in their identification decisions, and Post-decision wagering (PDW), in which participants place a monetary wager on their decisions. We conducted detailed explorations of the relationships between awareness and identification performance, looking to determine (1) which scale best correlates with performance, and (2) whether we can detect performance in the absence of awareness and how the scales differ from each other in terms of revealing such unconscious processing. Based on these findings we discuss whether perceptual awareness should be considered graded or dichotomous. Results showed that PAS showed a much stronger performance-awareness correlation than either CR or PDW, particularly for low stimulus intensities. In general, all scales indicated above-chance performance when participants claimed not to have seen anything. However, such above-chance performance only showed when we also observed a correlation between awareness and performance. Thus (1) PAS seems to be the most exhaustive measure of awareness, and (2) we find support for above-chance performance in the absence of subjective awareness, but such unconscious knowledge only contributes to performance when we observe conscious knowledge as well. Similarities and differences between scales are discussed in the light of consciousness theories and response strategies.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1069-1078
Number of pages10
JournalConsciousness and Cognition
Volume19
Issue number4
Early online date4 Feb 2010
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2010

Fingerprint

Consciousness

Keywords

  • consciousness
  • methodology
  • perceptual awareness scale
  • confidence ratings
  • post-decision wagering
  • subliminal percepton

Cite this

Measuring consciousness : is one measure better than the other? / Sandberg, Kristian; Timmermans, Bert; Overgaard, Morten; Cleeremans, Axel.

In: Consciousness and Cognition, Vol. 19, No. 4, 12.2010, p. 1069-1078.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sandberg, Kristian ; Timmermans, Bert ; Overgaard, Morten ; Cleeremans, Axel. / Measuring consciousness : is one measure better than the other?. In: Consciousness and Cognition. 2010 ; Vol. 19, No. 4. pp. 1069-1078.
@article{1583356e7c9947f58a20884bba5a4fed,
title = "Measuring consciousness: is one measure better than the other?",
abstract = "What is the best way of assessing the extent to which people are aware of a stimulus? Here, using a masked visual identification task, we compared three measures of subjective awareness: The Perceptual Awareness Scale (PAS), through which participants are asked to rate the clarity of their visual experience; confidence ratings (CR), through which participants express their confidence in their identification decisions, and Post-decision wagering (PDW), in which participants place a monetary wager on their decisions. We conducted detailed explorations of the relationships between awareness and identification performance, looking to determine (1) which scale best correlates with performance, and (2) whether we can detect performance in the absence of awareness and how the scales differ from each other in terms of revealing such unconscious processing. Based on these findings we discuss whether perceptual awareness should be considered graded or dichotomous. Results showed that PAS showed a much stronger performance-awareness correlation than either CR or PDW, particularly for low stimulus intensities. In general, all scales indicated above-chance performance when participants claimed not to have seen anything. However, such above-chance performance only showed when we also observed a correlation between awareness and performance. Thus (1) PAS seems to be the most exhaustive measure of awareness, and (2) we find support for above-chance performance in the absence of subjective awareness, but such unconscious knowledge only contributes to performance when we observe conscious knowledge as well. Similarities and differences between scales are discussed in the light of consciousness theories and response strategies.",
keywords = "consciousness, methodology, perceptual awareness scale, confidence ratings, post-decision wagering, subliminal percepton",
author = "Kristian Sandberg and Bert Timmermans and Morten Overgaard and Axel Cleeremans",
note = "KS & BT : equal contributions (shared first-authorship)",
year = "2010",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1016/j.concog.2009.12.013",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "1069--1078",
journal = "Consciousness and Cognition",
issn = "1053-8100",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Measuring consciousness

T2 - is one measure better than the other?

AU - Sandberg, Kristian

AU - Timmermans, Bert

AU - Overgaard, Morten

AU - Cleeremans, Axel

N1 - KS & BT : equal contributions (shared first-authorship)

PY - 2010/12

Y1 - 2010/12

N2 - What is the best way of assessing the extent to which people are aware of a stimulus? Here, using a masked visual identification task, we compared three measures of subjective awareness: The Perceptual Awareness Scale (PAS), through which participants are asked to rate the clarity of their visual experience; confidence ratings (CR), through which participants express their confidence in their identification decisions, and Post-decision wagering (PDW), in which participants place a monetary wager on their decisions. We conducted detailed explorations of the relationships between awareness and identification performance, looking to determine (1) which scale best correlates with performance, and (2) whether we can detect performance in the absence of awareness and how the scales differ from each other in terms of revealing such unconscious processing. Based on these findings we discuss whether perceptual awareness should be considered graded or dichotomous. Results showed that PAS showed a much stronger performance-awareness correlation than either CR or PDW, particularly for low stimulus intensities. In general, all scales indicated above-chance performance when participants claimed not to have seen anything. However, such above-chance performance only showed when we also observed a correlation between awareness and performance. Thus (1) PAS seems to be the most exhaustive measure of awareness, and (2) we find support for above-chance performance in the absence of subjective awareness, but such unconscious knowledge only contributes to performance when we observe conscious knowledge as well. Similarities and differences between scales are discussed in the light of consciousness theories and response strategies.

AB - What is the best way of assessing the extent to which people are aware of a stimulus? Here, using a masked visual identification task, we compared three measures of subjective awareness: The Perceptual Awareness Scale (PAS), through which participants are asked to rate the clarity of their visual experience; confidence ratings (CR), through which participants express their confidence in their identification decisions, and Post-decision wagering (PDW), in which participants place a monetary wager on their decisions. We conducted detailed explorations of the relationships between awareness and identification performance, looking to determine (1) which scale best correlates with performance, and (2) whether we can detect performance in the absence of awareness and how the scales differ from each other in terms of revealing such unconscious processing. Based on these findings we discuss whether perceptual awareness should be considered graded or dichotomous. Results showed that PAS showed a much stronger performance-awareness correlation than either CR or PDW, particularly for low stimulus intensities. In general, all scales indicated above-chance performance when participants claimed not to have seen anything. However, such above-chance performance only showed when we also observed a correlation between awareness and performance. Thus (1) PAS seems to be the most exhaustive measure of awareness, and (2) we find support for above-chance performance in the absence of subjective awareness, but such unconscious knowledge only contributes to performance when we observe conscious knowledge as well. Similarities and differences between scales are discussed in the light of consciousness theories and response strategies.

KW - consciousness

KW - methodology

KW - perceptual awareness scale

KW - confidence ratings

KW - post-decision wagering

KW - subliminal percepton

U2 - 10.1016/j.concog.2009.12.013

DO - 10.1016/j.concog.2009.12.013

M3 - Article

VL - 19

SP - 1069

EP - 1078

JO - Consciousness and Cognition

JF - Consciousness and Cognition

SN - 1053-8100

IS - 4

ER -