Cheongil Kim

@kimcheongil.bsky.social

Postdoc at Yonsei University Studying consciousness, metacognition, and attention

We have recently published work in Psych Science and JEP:LMC showing a surprising relationship between initial capture and learned suppression of salient distractors. Ultimately, this has led us to believe that attentional control is much more flexible than often assumed. Read more on my blog!

From Capture to Suppression: How Distraction Shapes Attentional Control

By Nick Gaspelin and Yue Zhang Zhang, Y. & Gaspelin, N. (2026a). From capture to control: Initial capture increases learned suppression. Psychological Science. 37(4), 2…

gaspelinblog.wordpress.com

New paper: "Introspection and Scientific Data" for the Handbook of Introspection, about the role of introspection in the production of scientific data. My view: introspection doesn't deliver a special 'subjective' kind of data and there's nothing special about studying consciousness.

Introducing meta-🔼! (meta-delta) Really excited about this one. We provide a principled, performance-corrected measure of metacognitive bias, placing it on an equal methodological footing with meta-d, and showing robust test-retest reliability to boot. Check out Kevin's thread for more details! 🧠🧪

Kevin O’Neill@kevingoneill.github.io · 3mo ago

In a new preprint w/ @tianqizhan.bsky.social & @smfleming.bsky.social, we developed a new measure of metacognitive bias (over/under confidence in individual decisions)! doi.org/10.31234/osf...

What does it mean for cognition to be Bayesian? The view that cognition is Bayesian inference is often intended at Marr's computational level. In a new paper in Nat Rev Psych, @kaixue98.bsky.social and I formulate the "explicit-Bayes" hypothesis that lives at the algorithmic level. rdcu.be/ff1XA

The explicit-Bayes hypothesis for cognition

Nature Reviews Psychology - It is often asserted that human cognition is Bayesian, but that broad claim is difficult to test in a falsifiable way. We suggest that researchers specifically assess a...

rdcu.be

Our new preprint on bioRxiv! rFEF+ is not necessary for exogenous attention, as revealed by TMS. And together with previous studies, we complete a double dissociation: rFEF+ is critical for endogenous but not exogenous attention, whereas V1/V2 is critical for exogenous but not endogenous attention

bioRxiv Neuroscience@biorxiv-neursci.bsky.social · 4mo ago

Transcranial magnetic stimulation to frontal cortex, unlike occipital stimulation, does not disrupt exogenous attention https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.04.10.717799v1

Are our intuitions about consciousness reliable? In our new paper, we argue that building a reliable scientific foundation for intuitions about consciousness is not only necessary—but also achievable—for advancing consciousness science. w/ Sang Chul Chong doi.org/10.3389/fpsy...

Frontiers | Reappraising intuitions about consciousness

Scientific studies of consciousness derive their legitimacy from individuals’ intuitions about the degree to which measured functions can be associated with ...

doi.org