Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26891625›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Neuroscience2016

Vicarious trial and error.

A David Redish

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 212 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
212citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

212 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Cognitive maps as a medium for thought.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Prefrontal Default Mode Network Interactions with Posterior Hippocampus during Exploration.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

152 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

A David RedishDepartment of Neuroscience, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455, USA.

Funding

Relating episodic memory and episodic future thinking in hippocampusR01MH080318 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI REDISH, A DAVID · 2008 to 2020
$3.7M
The covert expectation of reward during deliberationR01DA030672 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI REDISH, A DAVID · 2012 to 2016
$1.8M
Relating episodic memory and episodic future thinking in hippocampusR56MH080318 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI REDISH, A DAVID · 2014 to 2015
$747k
NIDA NIH HHS DA030672NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA030672NIMH NIH HHS MH080318NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH080318NIMH NIH HHS R56 MH080318
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When rats come to a decision point, they sometimes pause and look back and forth as if deliberating over the choice; at other times, they proceed as if they have already made their decision. In the 1930s, this pause-and-look behaviour was termed 'vicarious trial and error' (VTE), with the implication that the rat was 'thinking about the future'. The discovery in 2007 that the firing of hippocampal place cells gives rise to alternating representations of each of the potential path options in a serial manner during VTE suggested a possible neural mechanism that could underlie the representations of future outcomes. More-recent experiments examining VTE in rats suggest that there are direct parallels to human processes of deliberative decision making, working memory and mental time travel.

Indexed as

AnimalsBrainDecision MakingHumansMental ProcessesModels, BiologicalNeuronsRats

Identifiers

PMID26891625
PMCPMC5029271

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.