Can "Hazard-Cost-Effectiveness Analysis" improve the risk management of chemicals under REACH?

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) is a decision-making framework to prioritize policy decisions for chemicals. Differences in hazard profiles among chemicals are not integrated in CEA under the EU REACH Regulation, which could limit its relevance. Another concern is that two different economic decision support methods (CEA for chemicals considered as PBTs or vPvBs from a regulatory perspective and Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) for others) are used under REACH. To address this situation, we define "Hazard" CEA by integrating a hazard score, based on persistence, bioaccumulation and (eco)toxicity, in the effect indicator of CEA. We test different designs and parameterizations of Hazard-CEA on a set of past socio-economic assessments under REACH for PBT and non-PBT chemicals. Weighing and thresholds in hazard scores do not have a significant impact on the outcome of Hazard-CEA but the design of the hazard scoring method does. We suggest using an integrated and unweighted scoring method with a multiplicative formulation based on the notion of risk. Hazard-CEA could be used for both PBT and non-PBT chemicals, to use a single method in REACH and therefore improve consistency in policy decisions. Our work also suggests that using Hazard-CEA could help make decision easier.

Confidence in visual motion discrimination is preserved in individuals with schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Metacognition is the set of reflexive processes that allows humans to evaluate the accuracy of their mental operations. Metacognitive deficits have been described in people with schizophrenia using mostly narrative assessment, and they have been linked to several key symptoms. METHODS: We assessed metacognitive performance objectively by asking people with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder (n = 20) and matched healthy participants (n = 21) to perform a visual discrimination task and report their confidence in their performance. Metacognitive performance was defined as the adequacy between visual discrimination performance and confidence. RESULTS: Bayesian analyses revealed equivalent metacognitive performance in the 2 groups, despite a weaker association between confidence and trajectory tracking during task execution among people with schizophrenia. We reproduced these results using an evidence accumulation model, which showed similar decisional processes in the 2 groups. LIMITATIONS: These results from a relatively small study sample cannot be generalized to other perceptual and nonperceptual tasks. To meet this purpose, ecological tasks are needed. As well, the role of antipsychotic medication and design deserves greater attention in the future. CONCLUSION: We found similar decisional and metacognitive capabilities between people with schizophrenia and healthy controls in a visual discrimination task.

From local to global estimations of confidence in perceptual decisions.

Perceptual confidence has been an important topic recently. However, one key limitation in current approaches is that most studies have focused on confidence judgments made for single decisions. In three experiments, we investigate how these local confidence judgments relate and contribute to global confidence judgments, by which observers summarize their performance over a series of perceptual decisions. We report two main results. First, we find that participants exhibit more overconfidence in their local than in their global judgments of performance, an observation mirroring the aggregation effect in knowledge-based decisions. We further show that this effect is specific to confidence judgments and does not reflect a calculation bias. Second, we document a novel effect by which participants' global confidence is larger for sets which are more heterogeneous in terms of difficulty, even when actual performance is controlled for. Surprisingly, we find that this effect of variability also occurs at the level of local confidence judgments, in a manner that fully explains the effect at the global level. Overall, our results indicate that global confidence is based on local confidence, although these two processes can be partially dissociated. We discuss possible theoretical accounts to relate and empirical investigations of how observers develop and use a global sense of perceptual confidence. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

How overconfidence bias influences suboptimality in perceptual decision making.

In perceptual decision making, it is often found that human observers combine sensory information and prior knowledge suboptimally. Typically, in detection tasks, when an alternative is a priori more likely to occur, observers choose it more frequently to account for the unequal base rate but not to the extent they should, a phenomenon referred to as "conservative decision bias" (i.e., observers do not shift their decision criterion enough). One theoretical explanation of this phenomenon is that observers are overconfident in their ability to interpret sensory information, resulting in overweighting the sensory information relative to prior knowledge. Here, we derived formally this candidate model, and we tested it in a visual discrimination task in which we manipulated the prior probabilities of occurrence of the stimuli. We measured confidence in decisions and decision criterion placement in two separate experimental sessions for the same participants (N = 69). Both overconfidence bias and conservative decision bias were found in our data, but critically the link that was predicted between these two quantities was absent. Our data suggested instead that when informed about the a priori probability, overconfident participants put less effort into processing sensory information. These findings offer new perspectives on the role of overconfidence bias to explain suboptimal decisions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Metacognitive improvement: Disentangling adaptive training from experimental confounds.

Metacognition is defined as the capacity to monitor and control one's own cognitive processes. Recently, Carpenter and colleagues (2019) reported that metacognitive performance can be improved through adaptive training: healthy participants performed a perceptual discrimination task, and subsequently indicated confidence in their response. Metacognitive performance, defined as how much information these confidence judgments contain about the accuracy of perceptual decisions, was found to increase in a group of participants receiving monetary reward based on their confidence judgments over hundreds of trials and multiple sessions. By contrast, in a control group where only perceptual performance was incentivized, metacognitive performance remained constant across experimental sessions. We identified two possible confounds that may have led to an artificial increase in metacognitive performance, namely the absence of reward in the initial session and an inconsistency between the reward scheme and the instructions about the confidence scale. We thus conducted a preregistered conceptual replication where all sessions were rewarded and where instructions were consistent with the reward scheme. Critically, once these two confounds were corrected we found moderate evidence for an absence of metacognitive training. Our data thus suggest that previous claims about metacognitive training are premature, and calls for more research on how to train individuals to monitor their own performance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

How does symbolic success affect redistribution in left-wing voters? A focus on the 2017 French presidential election.

Redistribution preferences depend on factors such as self-interest and political views. Recently, Deffains et al. (2016) reported that redistributive behavior is also sensitive to the actual experience of success or failure in a real effort task. While successful participants ('overachievers') are more likely to attribute their success to their effort rather than luck and opt for less redistribution, unsuccessful participants ('underachievers') tend to attribute their failure to external factors and opt for more redistribution. The aim of the present study was to test how the experience of success (symbolic success) and political views interact in producing redistributive behavior in an experimental setting. The study was conducted during the 2017 French presidential election. Our sample was biased towards left-wing, and most participants reported voting for Mélenchon, Hamon or Macron. Our findings reveal that 1) Macron voters redistribute less than Hamon voters who themselves redistribute less than Mélenchon voters, 2) overachievers redistribute less than underachievers only among Mélenchon voters. This suggests that redistributive behavior is governed primarily by political opinions, and that influence by exogenous manipulation of symbolic success is not homogenous across left-wing political groups.

Does social context impact metacognition? Evidence from stereotype threat in a visual search task.

While recent studies have emphasized the role of metacognitive judgments in social interactions, whether social context might reciprocally impact individuals' metacognition remains an open question. It has been proposed that such might be the case in situations involving stereotype threat. Here, we provide the first empirical test of this hypothesis. Using a visual search task, we asked participants, on a trial-by-trial basis, to monitor the unfolding and accuracy of their search processes, and we developed a computational model to measure the accuracy of their metacognition. Results indicated that stereotype threat enhanced metacognitive monitoring of both outcomes and processes. Our study thus shows that social context can actually affect metacognition.

Metacognitive ability predicts learning cue-stimulus associations in the absence of external feedback.

Learning how certain cues in our environment predict specific states of nature is an essential ability for survival. However learning typically requires external feedback, which is not always available in everyday life. One potential substitute for external feedback could be to use the confidence we have in our decisions. Under this hypothesis, if no external feedback is available, then the agents' ability to learn about predictive cues should increase with the quality of their confidence judgments (i.e. metacognitive efficiency). We tested and confirmed this novel prediction in an experimental study using a perceptual decision task. We evaluated in separate sessions the metacognitive abilities of participants (N = 65) and their abilities to learn about predictive cues. As predicted, participants with greater metacognitive abilities learned more about the cues. Knowledge of the cues improved accuracy in the perceptual task. Our results provide strong evidence that confidence plays an active role in improving learning and performance.

Metacognition about the past and future: quantifying common and distinct influences on prospective and retrospective judgments of self-performance.

Metacognitive judgments of performance can be retrospective (such as confidence in past choices) or prospective (such as a prediction of success). Several lines of evidence indicate that these two aspects of metacognition are dissociable, suggesting they rely on distinct cues or cognitive resources. However, because prospective and retrospective judgments are often elicited and studied in separate experimental paradigms, their similarities and differences remain unclear. Here we characterize prospective and retrospective judgments of performance in the same perceptual discrimination task using repeated stimuli of constant difficulty. Using an incentive-compatible mechanism for eliciting subjective probabilities, subjects expressed their confidence in past choices together with their predictions of success in future choices. We found distinct influences on each judgment type: retrospective judgments were strongly influenced by the speed and accuracy of the immediately preceding decision, whereas prospective judgments were influenced by previous confidence over a longer time window. In contrast, global levels of confidence were correlated across judgments, indicative of a domain-general overconfidence that transcends temporal focus.

Confidence measurement in the light of signal detection theory.

We compare three alternative methods for eliciting retrospective confidence in the context of a simple perceptual task: the Simple Confidence Rating (a direct report on a numerical scale), the Quadratic Scoring Rule (a post-wagering procedure), and the Matching Probability (MP; a generalization of the no-loss gambling method). We systematically compare the results obtained with these three rules to the theoretical confidence levels that can be inferred from performance in the perceptual task using Signal Detection Theory (SDT). We find that the MP provides better results in that respect. We conclude that MP is particularly well suited for studies of confidence that use SDT as a theoretical framework.

Impact of information on intentions to vaccinate in a potential epidemic: Swine-origin Influenza A (H1N1).

Vaccination campaigns to prevent the spread of epidemics are successful only if the targeted populations subscribe to the recommendations of health authorities. However, because compulsory vaccination is hardly conceivable in modern democracies, governments need to convince their populations through efficient and persuasive information campaigns. In the context of the swine-origin A (H1N1) 2009 pandemic, we use an interactive study among the general public in the South of France, with 175 participants, to explore what type of information can induce change in vaccination intentions at both aggregate and individual levels. We find that individual attitudes to vaccination are based on rational appraisal of the situation, and that it is information of a purely scientific nature that has the only significant positive effect on intention to vaccinate.