ArticlePLoS biology2017
Integration of individual and social information for decision-making in groups of different sizes.
Article in PLoS biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 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
34 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modeling other minds: Bayesian inference explains human choices in group decision-making.Science advances · 2019Trial
- When Others Agree More Closely: Judgment Similarity Influences Conformity.Cognitive science · 2026Article
- Social learning dynamically shapes moral decision-making by biasing subjective valuation.PLoS biology · 2026Article
- Adaptive yet suboptimal integration of advice in decision-making.Communications psychology · 2026Article
- A Bayesian perspective on observers' inference of group norms.NPJ science of learning · 2026Article
- Choosing to know: Children's decision to actively request social-norm information and their sharing behaviour.British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953) · 2026Article
- Interpersonal brain synchronization at frontopolar cortices underlies better advice-taking in groups.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2026Article
- 3D-printed models in the courtroom: mock-jurors' perceptions and experiences of 3D-printed models of human skeletal remains.Psychiatry, psychology, and law : an interdisciplinary journal of the Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law · 2026Article
- Adaptive mechanisms of social and asocial learning in immersive collective foraging.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Social conformity is a heuristic when individual risky decision-making is disrupted.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Humans flexibly integrate social information despite interindividual differences in reward.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Heterogeneity in strategy use during arbitration between experiential and observational learning.Nature communications · 2024Article
- A frontopolar-temporal circuit determines the impact of social information in macaque decision making.Neuron · 2024Article
- Article
- Brain Systems Underlying Fundamental Motivations of Human Social Conformity.Neuroscience bulletin · 2023Review
- Experimental and meta-analytic evidence that source variability of misinformation does not increase eyewitness suggestibility independently of repetition of misinformation.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Distinct neurocomputational mechanisms support informational and socially normative conformity.PLoS biology · 2022Article
- Contagion of Temporal Discounting Value Preferences in Neurotypical and Autistic Adults.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2022Article
- Humans depart from optimal computational models of interactive decision-making during competition under partial information.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Characterization of the Core Determinants of Social Influence From a Computational and Cognitive Perspective.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When making judgments in a group, individuals often revise their initial beliefs about the best judgment to make given what others believe. Despite the ubiquity of this phenomenon, we know little about how the brain updates beliefs when integrating personal judgments (individual information) with those of others (social information). Here, we investigated the neurocomputational mechanisms of how we adapt our judgments to those made by groups of different sizes, in the context of jury decisions for a criminal. By testing different theoretical models, we showed that a social Bayesian inference model captured changes in judgments better than 2 other models. Our results showed that participants updated their beliefs by appropriately weighting individual and social sources of information according to their respective credibility. When investigating 2 fundamental computations of Bayesian inference, belief updates and credibility estimates of social information, we found that the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC) computed the level of belief updates, while the bilateral frontopolar cortex (FPC) was more engaged in individuals who assigned a greater credibility to the judgments of a larger group. Moreover, increased functional connectivity between these 2 brain regions reflected a greater influence of group size on the relative credibility of social information. These results provide a mechanistic understanding of the computational roles of the FPC-dACC network in steering judgment adaptation to a group's opinion. Taken together, these findings provide a computational account of how the human brain integrates individual and social information for decision-making in groups.
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.