ArticleCognitive processing2020
From high- to one-dimensional dynamics of decision making: testing simplifications in attractor models.
Article in Cognitive processing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Computational modeling of attractor-based neural processes involved in the preparation of voluntary actions.Cognitive neurodynamics · 2024Article
- Is value-based choice repetition susceptible to medial frontal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)? A preregistered study.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Computational models introduce simplifications that need to be understood and validated. For attractor models of decision making, the main simplification is the high-level representation of different sub-processes of the complex decision system in one dynamic description of the overall process dynamics. This simplification implies that the overall process dynamics of the decision system are independent from specific values handled in different sub-processes. Here, we test the validity of this simplification empirically by investigating choice perseveration in a nonverbal, value-based decision task. Specifically, we tested whether choice perseveration occurred irrespectively of the attribute dimension as suggested by a simulation of the computational model. We find evidence supporting the validity of the simplification. We conclude that the simplification might capture mechanistic aspects of decision-making processes, and that the summation of the overall process dynamics of decision systems into one single variable is a valid approach in computational modeling. Supplement materials such as empirical data, analysis scripts, and the computational model are publicly available at the Open Science Framework (osf.io/7fb5q).
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.