Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29357467›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2018

When uncertain, does human self-motion decision-making fully utilize complete information?

Torin K Clark, Yongwoo Yi, Raquel C Galvan-Garza, María Carolina Bermúdez Rey, Daniel M Merfeld

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Intra-individual consistency of vestibular perceptual thresholds.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

5 authors.

Torin K ClarkJenks Vestibular Physiology Laboratory, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Boston, Massachusetts.
Yongwoo YiJenks Vestibular Physiology Laboratory, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Boston, Massachusetts.
Raquel C Galvan-GarzaMan-Vehicle Laboratory, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
María Carolina Bermúdez ReyJenks Vestibular Physiology Laboratory, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Boston, Massachusetts.
Daniel M MerfeldJenks Vestibular Physiology Laboratory, Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary, Boston, Massachusetts.

Funding

Employing Vestibular Thresholds to Improve Patient DiagnosisR01DC014924 · NIDCD · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI LEWIS, RICHARD F, MERFELD, DANIEL M · 2015 to 2019
$2.7M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC014924
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When forced to choose humans often feel uncertain. Investigations of human perceptual decision-making often employ signal detection theory, which assumes that even when uncertain all available information is fully utilized. However, other studies have suggested or assumed that, when uncertain, human subjects guess totally at random, ignoring available information. When uncertain, do humans simply guess totally at random? Or do humans fully utilize complete information? Or does behavior fall between these two extremes yielding "above chance" performance without fully utilizing complete information? While it is often assumed complete information is fully utilized, even when uncertain, to our knowledge this has never been experimentally confirmed. To answer this question, we combined numerical simulations, theoretical analyses, and human studies performed using a self-motion direction-recognition perceptual decision-making task (did I rotate left or right?). Subjects were instructed to make forced-choice binary (left/right) and trinary (left/right/uncertain) decisions when cued following each stimulus. Our results show that humans 1) do not guess at random when uncertain and 2) make binary and trinary decisions equally well. These findings show that humans fully utilize complete information when uncertain for our perceptual decision-making task. This helps unify signal detection theory and other models of forced-choice decision-making which allow for uncertain responses. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Humans make many perceptual decisions every day. But what if we are uncertain? While many studies assume that humans fully utilize complete information, other studies have suggested and/or assumed that when we're uncertain and forced to decide, information is not fully utilized. While humans tend to perform above chance when uncertain, no earlier study has tested whether available information is fully utilized. Our results show that humans make fully informed decisions even when uncertain.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalUncertaintyAdultComputer SimulationDecision MakingHumansMovementProprioceptionSpace PerceptionVestibule, Labyrinthhumanorientation perceptionself-motionthresholdsvestibular

Identifiers

PMID29357467
PMCPMC5966734

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.