Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31086374›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2019

Human representation of multimodal distributions as clusters of samples.

Jingwei Sun, Jian Li, Hang Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Jingwei SunSchool of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences and Beijing Key Laboratory of Behavior and Mental Health, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Jian LiSchool of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences and Beijing Key Laboratory of Behavior and Mental Health, Peking University, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-3941-2622
Hang ZhangSchool of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences and Beijing Key Laboratory of Behavior and Mental Health, Peking University, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-9771-0660

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Behavioral and neuroimaging evidence shows that human decisions are sensitive to the statistical regularities (mean, variance, skewness, etc.) of reward distributions. However, it is unclear what representations human observers form to approximate reward distributions, or probability distributions in general. When the possible values of a probability distribution are numerous, it is cognitively costly and perhaps unrealistic to maintain in mind the probability of each possible value. Here we propose a Clusters of Samples (CoS) representation model: The samples of the to-be-represented distribution are classified into a small number of clusters and only the centroids and relative weights of the clusters are retained for future use. We tested the behavioral relevance of CoS in four experiments. On each trial, human subjects reported the mean and mode of a sequentially presented multimodal distribution of spatial positions or orientations. By varying the global and local features of the distributions, we observed systematic errors in the reported mean and mode. We found that our CoS representation of probability distributions outperformed alternative models in accounting for subjects' response patterns. The ostensible influence of positive/negative skewness on the over/under estimation of the reported mean, analogous to the "skewness preference" phenomenon in decisions, could be well explained by models based on CoS.

Indexed as

Models, PsychologicalRewardAdultCluster AnalysisCognitionComputational BiologyDecision MakingDecision TheoryFemaleHumansMaleModels, StatisticalPhotic StimulationProbabilityUncertaintyYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31086374
PMCPMC6534328

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.