HSRP-332

Confidence gates evidence integration post-decisionally. High confidence produces a modulation of post-decision neural processing such that integration of confirmatory evidence is amplified while disconfirmatory evidence processing is abolished. MEG plus modelling.

Proof page — generated from the HSRP research notes register. Where a block has no data, it says so.

1. Header

Number: HSRP-332
Category: Neuroscience
Grade: ESTABLISHED
Status: ACTIVE
Entry form: Full
First entered: Not recorded — added to the register in supplement 004
Last revised: Not recorded
Register entry: https://worldfreedomcore.com/hsrp-research-notes#HSRP-332

2. The claim, in full

Confidence gates evidence integration post-decisionally. High confidence produces a modulation of post-decision neural processing such that integration of confirmatory evidence is amplified while disconfirmatory evidence processing is abolished. MEG plus modelling.

3. What it rests on

Rollwage, Loosen, Hauser, Moran, Dolan & Fleming, "Confidence drives a neural confirmation bias," Nature Communications 11:2634 (2020). PMID 32457308, PMCID PMC7250867, open access.

Magnetoencephalography with computational modelling. High confidence in a decision produced a modulation of post-decision neural processing such that integration of confirmatory evidence was amplified while disconfirmatory evidence processing was ABOLISHED — not down-weighted.

The authors' own framing: confidence shapes a selective neural gating for choice-consistent information.

Sources: SRC-481

No confidence intervals are recorded for any figure in this block.

4. Sources

SRC-481 · PRIORITY · Confidence drives a neural confirmation bias — Rollwage, Loosen, Hauser, Moran, Dolan & Fleming, Nature Communications 11:2634 (2020)
Pinpoint: not recorded · Access: Open access

Open access (PMCID PMC7250867).

5. Counter-evidence

None recorded as of 2026-09-14. The finding has not been challenged in the literature located to date.

This is a single study. It has not been independently replicated. The register grades it ESTABLISHED on the strength of the method and the directness of the measurement, not on replication — and that distinction is stated here rather than assumed.

6. Why this grade

Direct measurement rather than inference. MEG timing plus computational modelling of evidence accumulation, on a perceptual task with no identity content — so the effect cannot be attributed to motivated reasoning about the subject matter.

The abolition result is the reason for the grade. A down-weighting finding would be consistent with several mechanisms. Abolition of the integration process for disconfirming evidence is specific, and it explains a phenomenon the framework had described but not accounted for: why the subject detects no internal error signal. There was no pause because there was nothing to weigh.

Held at ESTABLISHED rather than PROBABLE because the measurement is direct and the effect size is categorical rather than marginal. The single-study limitation is recorded in block 5 rather than discounted in the grade.

The register defines ESTABLISHED as: Supported directly by primary texts or published findings.

7. Correction history

No correction events are recorded. The entry's status is ACTIVE: no later entry amends, supersedes or withdraws it.

Later entries that mention this observation: HSRP-334.

8. Related observations

HSRP-334 · PROBABLE · The Rollwage–Altemeyer convergence, unclaimed. HSRP-332 measures integration of disconfirming evidence being abolished; HSRP-333 records a person accepting evidence as factual and ignoring what it contradicts. Same phenomenon, two levels of description, twenty years apart, neither literature citing the other.
Relation: not recorded

9. Where this appears on the site

Content pages that cite this observation inline:

Psycho Vulgarism
“Psycho-Vulgarism (PV) represents a catastrophic structural reversal of this normative cognitive sequence.”

Pages citing a source this observation rests on: /neuroscience.

10. Open questions

What would strengthen it: independent replication; the same paradigm run with identity-relevant rather than perceptual stimuli; a test of whether the gating is modifiable by the metacognitive training that has been shown to transfer across tasks.
What would falsify it: failure to replicate the abolition result; demonstration that disconfirming evidence IS integrated but at a stage the MEG measure does not capture.

11. Machine block

The register record this page was generated from, with the derived fields added:

{
  "grade": "ESTABLISHED",
  "status": "ACTIVE",
  "category": "NEU",
  "title": "Confidence gates evidence integration post-decisionally. High confidence produces a modulation of post-decision neural processing such that integration of confirmatory evidence is amplified while disconfirmatory evidence processing is abolished. MEG plus modelling.",
  "entry_form": "full",
  "note": null,
  "n": 332,
  "ref": "HSRP-332",
  "cited_by": [
    "SRC-481"
  ],
  "related": [
    "HSRP-334"
  ],
  "category_name": "Neuroscience",
  "supplement": "004",
  "evidence": [
    {
      "statement": [
        "Rollwage, Loosen, Hauser, Moran, Dolan & Fleming, \"Confidence drives a neural confirmation bias,\" Nature Communications 11:2634 (2020). PMID 32457308, PMCID PMC7250867, open access.",
        "Magnetoencephalography with computational modelling. High confidence in a decision produced a modulation of post-decision neural processing such that integration of confirmatory evidence was amplified while disconfirmatory evidence processing was ABOLISHED — not down-weighted.",
        "The authors' own framing: confidence shapes a selective neural gating for choice-consistent information."
      ],
      "sources": [
        "SRC-481"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "counter_evidence_note": [
    "None recorded as of 2026-09-14. The finding has not been challenged in the literature located to date.",
    "This is a single study. It has not been independently replicated. The register grades it ESTABLISHED on the strength of the method and the directness of the measurement, not on replication — and that distinction is stated here rather than assumed."
  ],
  "counter_evidence_checked": "2026-09-14",
  "grade_rationale": [
    "Direct measurement rather than inference. MEG timing plus computational modelling of evidence accumulation, on a perceptual task with no identity content — so the effect cannot be attributed to motivated reasoning about the subject matter.",
    "The abolition result is the reason for the grade. A down-weighting finding would be consistent with several mechanisms. Abolition of the integration process for disconfirming evidence is specific, and it explains a phenomenon the framework had described but not accounted for: why the subject detects no internal error signal. There was no pause because there was nothing to weigh.",
    "Held at ESTABLISHED rather than PROBABLE because the measurement is direct and the effect size is categorical rather than marginal. The single-study limitation is recorded in block 5 rather than discounted in the grade."
  ],
  "open_questions": {
    "strengthen": [
      "independent replication; the same paradigm run with identity-relevant rather than perceptual stimuli; a test of whether the gating is modifiable by the metacognitive training that has been shown to transfer across tasks."
    ],
    "falsify": [
      "failure to replicate the abolition result; demonstration that disconfirming evidence IS integrated but at a stage the MEG measure does not capture."
    ]
  },
  "appearances": [
    "/psycho-vulgarism"
  ],
  "missing_fields": [
    "entered",
    "revised",
    "intervals",
    "pinpoint for SRC-481",
    "history",
    "relation to HSRP-334"
  ]
}

https://worldfreedomcore.com/hsrp-research-notes.json

Generated from hsrp-research-notes.json (register generated 2026-09-19). Nothing on this page is written by hand. 6 fields not yet recorded.