ArticleScientific reports2018
Active Confirmation Bias in the Evaluative Processing of Food Images.
Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Crosstalk between delayed and immediate subjective evaluation tasks.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Speed is associated with polarization during subjective evaluation: no tradeoff, but an effect of the ease of processing.Cognitive neurodynamics · 2024Article
- Predictive cues elicit a liminal confirmation bias in the moral evaluation of real-world images.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Setting the space for deliberation in decision-making.Cognitive neurodynamics · 2021Review
- The Role of Temperature in Moral Decision-Making: Limited Reproducibility.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Tracking the Influence of Predictive Cues on the Evaluation of Food Images: Volatility Enables Nudging.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Urgency Promotes Affective Disengagement: Effects From Bivalent Cues on Preference Formation for Abstract Images.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
- Evaluative Processing of Food Images: Longer Viewing for Indecisive Preference Formation.Frontiers in psychology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Predictive processing is fundamental to many aspects of the human mind, including perception and decision-making. It remains to be elucidated, however, in which way predictive information impacts on evaluative processing, particularly in tasks that employ bivalent stimulus sets. Various accounts, including framing, proactive interference, and cognitive control, appear to imply contradictory proposals on the relation between prediction and preference formation. To disambiguate whether predictive cues produce congruent biases versus opponent mechanisms in evaluative processing, we conducted two experiments in which participants were asked to rate individual food images. The image database included appetitive and aversive items. In each trial, a cue predicted, with varying degrees of reliability, the valence of the impending food image. In both experiments, we found that the ratings exhibited congruent biases as a function of the reliability of the predictive cue, with the highest evaluations following the most reliable positive-valence predictions. Eye prepositioning further showed a selective spatial bias suggestive of response preparation in line with the predictions. The response times also exhibited a pattern of results consistent with selective preparation, producing slow responses following invalid predictions. The data suggested an active form of evaluative processing, implementing a confirmation bias that aims to accommodate the prediction.
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.