ArticleSocial cognitive and affective neuroscience2021
Foraging optimally in social neuroscience: computations and methodological considerations.
Article in Social cognitive and affective neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Noninvasive Brain Stimulation over the Frontopolar Cortex Promotes Willingness to Exert Cognitive Effort in a Foraging-Like Sequential Choice Task.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Trial
- Dopamine Modulates Dynamic Decision-Making during Foraging.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2020Trial
- Context-dependent feature modulation shapes human decision policies in approach-avoidance conflicts.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Review
- Dopamine Boosts Motivation for Prosocial Effort in Parkinson's Disease.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026Article
- Humans are more prosocial in poor foraging environments.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Decision context and neurobehavioural disturbance in Huntington's disease.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2026Article
- Continuous dynamics of cooperation and competition in social decision-making.Communications psychology · 2025Article
- Foraging as an ethological framework for neuroscience.Trends in neurosciences · 2025Review
- Stochastic decisions support optimal foraging of volatile environments, and are disrupted by anxiety.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2025Article
- A reward self-bias leads to more optimal foraging for ourselves than others.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Reviewing explore/exploit decision-making as a transdiagnostic target for psychosis, depression, and anxiety.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2024Review
- Social environment-based opportunity costs dictate when people leave social interactions.Communications psychology · 2024Article
- Neural implementation of computational mechanisms underlying the continuous trade-off between cooperation and competition.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Filling the gaps: Cognitive control as a critical lens for understanding mechanisms of value-based decision-making.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2022Review
- Synthetic Spatial Foraging With Active Inference in a Geocaching Task.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Delay discounting and under-valuing of recent information predict poorer adherence to social distancing measures during the COVID-19 pandemic.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Computational methods in social neuroscience: recent advances, new tools and future directions.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2021Article
- Uncertainty drives deviations in normative foraging decision strategies.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2021Article
- Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Research in social neuroscience has increasingly begun to use the tools of computational neuroscience to better understand behaviour. Such approaches have proven fruitful for probing underlying neural mechanisms. However, little attention has been paid to how the structure of experimental tasks relates to real-world decisions, and the problems that brains have evolved to solve. To go significantly beyond current understanding, we must begin to use paradigms and mathematical models from behavioural ecology, which offer insights into the decisions animals must make successfully in order to survive. One highly influential theory-marginal value theorem (MVT)-precisely characterises and provides an optimal solution to a vital foraging decision that most species must make: the patch-leaving problem. Animals must decide when to leave collecting rewards in a current patch (location) and travel somewhere else. We propose that many questions posed in social neuroscience can be approached as patch-leaving problems. A richer understanding of the neural mechanisms underlying social behaviour will be obtained by using MVT. In this 'tools of the trade' article, we outline the patch-leaving problem, the computations of MVT and discuss the application to social neuroscience. Furthermore, we consider the practical challenges and offer solutions for designing paradigms probing patch leaving, both behaviourally and when using neuroimaging techniques.
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.