ArticleFrontiers in psychology2013
A canonical theory of dynamic decision-making.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and evaluation of AI-based clinical decision support system for streamlining breast multidisciplinary team meetings.BMJ health & care informatics · 2026Article
- Linked Argumentation Graphs for Multidisciplinary Decision Support.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Risk Decision Making and Executive Function among Adolescents and Young Adults.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Computer-interpretable guidelines: electronic tools to enhance the utility of thyroid nodule clinical practice guidelines and risk stratification tools.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- "Oh no, the forest is burning!" cultural differences in the complex problem-solving process only under high uncertainty.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Iowa Gambling Task and Distortion in Perception of Body Image Among Adolescent Women With Eating Disorders.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Dynamics of individual perceptual decisions.Journal of neurophysiology · 2016Review
- Dynamics of decision-making: from evidence accumulation to preference and belief.Frontiers in psychology · 2013Article
- Examining the Role of Stress and Team Support in Decision Making under Uncertainty and Time Pressure.MDM policy & practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Decision-making behavior is studied in many very different fields, from medicine and economics to psychology and neuroscience, with major contributions from mathematics and statistics, computer science, AI, and other technical disciplines. However the conceptualization of what decision-making is and methods for studying it vary greatly and this has resulted in fragmentation of the field. A theory that can accommodate various perspectives may facilitate interdisciplinary working. We present such a theory in which decision-making is articulated as a set of canonical functions that are sufficiently general to accommodate diverse viewpoints, yet sufficiently precise that they can be instantiated in different ways for specific theoretical or practical purposes. The canons cover the whole decision cycle, from the framing of a decision based on the goals, beliefs, and background knowledge of the decision-maker to the formulation of decision options, establishing preferences over them, and making commitments. Commitments can lead to the initiation of new decisions and any step in the cycle can incorporate reasoning about previous decisions and the rationales for them, and lead to revising or abandoning existing commitments. The theory situates decision-making with respect to other high-level cognitive capabilities like problem solving, planning, and collaborative decision-making. The canonical approach is assessed in three domains: cognitive and neuropsychology, artificial intelligence, and decision engineering.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.