Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30147145›Full record

ArticleJournal of mathematical psychology2017

Model-based cognitive neuroscience.

Thomas J Palmeri, Bradley C Love, Brandon M Turner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of mathematical psychology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Neural Bases of Affect-Based Impulsivity: A Decision Neuroscience Account.Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. On Testing and Developing Cognitive Models.Computational brain & behavior · 2019
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Bayesian statistical approaches to evaluating cognitive models.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science · 2018
    Review
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

3 authors.

Thomas J PalmeriVanderbilt University, United States.
Bradley C LoveUniversity College London, United Kingdom.
Brandon M TurnerThe Ohio State University, United States.

Funding

Shop Module CoreP30EY008126 · NEI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI CHRISTOS CONSTANTINIDIS · 1989 to 2026
$19.6M
ONTOGENESIS OF CATEGORIZATION: LINKING DEVELOPMENT, MECHANISMS, AND BIOLOGYP01HD080679 · NICHD · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI SLOUTSKY, VLADIMIR M · 2016 to 2020
$5.8M
Stochastic Models of Visual SearchR01EY021833 · NEI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI LOGAN, GORDON DENNIS, PALMERI, THOMAS · 2011 to 2023
$3.3M
NEI NIH HHS P30 EY008126NEI NIH HHS R01 EY021833NICHD NIH HHS P01 HD080679Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This special issue explores the growing intersection between mathematical psychology and cognitive neuroscience. Mathematical psychology, and cognitive modeling more generally, has a rich history of formalizing and testing hypotheses about cognitive mechanisms within a mathematical and computational language, making exquisite predictions of how people perceive, learn, remember, and decide. Cognitive neuroscience aims to identify neural mechanisms associated with key aspects of cognition using techniques like neurophysiology, electrophysiology, and structural and functional brain imaging. These two come together in a powerful new approach called

Indexed as

Cognitive modelingCognitive neuroscienceModel-based cognitive neuroscience

Identifiers

PMID30147145
PMCPMC6103531

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.