AbstractIn the area of metacognition research, different methods have been used to study participants’ subjective sense of confidence in their choices. Among the most often used methods are explicit reports of subjective confidence, post-decision wagering and measuring additional info-seeking behavior. While all three methods are thought to measure confidence, they differ greatly in terms of practical execution and theoretical foundation. The method of reverse correlation has previously been used to determine which aspects of the stimulus influence decisions and confidence judgments. Here we compare the three methods of confidence assessment using reverse correlation analysis. Explicit reports and post-decision wagering revealed a positive association of stimulus information with choices and reduced decision weights for low-confidence trials. When confidence was assessed using the info-seeking method, low-confidence trials showed an inverted association with primary stimulus information. Using modelling of the behavioral data, we show how the reverse correlation results of all three methods can be explained by a simple model of confidence when internal error-corrections are allowed during seeking of additional information.