ArticleNature human behaviour2020
Predictors of risky foraging behaviour in healthy young people.
Article in Nature human behaviour, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Acetylcholine and noradrenaline enhance foraging optimality in humans.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Trial
- The effects of hydrocortisone and yohimbine on human behavior in approach-avoidance conflicts.Psychopharmacology · 2023Trial
- Using computer games to explore foraging-predation trade-offs and spatial learning in humans.Royal Society open science · 2026Article
- Human approach-avoidance conflict behaviour relates to transdiagnostic psychiatric symptom dimensions.Translational psychiatry · 2026Article
- Agent-Based Behavioral Modeling of Human Associative Learning in a Complex Approach-Avoidance Conflict Task.Computational brain & behavior · 2025Article
- Stochastic decisions support optimal foraging of volatile environments, and are disrupted by anxiety.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2025Article
- Emotions and individual differences shape human foraging under threat.Nature. Mental health · 2025Article
- Reviewing explore/exploit decision-making as a transdiagnostic target for psychosis, depression, and anxiety.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2024Review
- Mating proximity blinds threat perception.Nature · 2024Article
- Functional sophistication in human escape.iScience · 2023Article
- Self-reported childhood family adversity is linked to an attenuated gain of trust during adolescence.Nature communications · 2023Article
- The effect of apathy and compulsivity on planning and stopping in sequential decision-making.PLoS biology · 2022Article
- Cross-species anxiety tests in psychiatry: pitfalls and promises.Molecular psychiatry · 2022Review
- Multi-Round Trust Game Quantifies Inter-Individual Differences in Social Exchange from Adolescence to Adulthood.Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
During adolescence and early adulthood, learning when to avoid threats and when to pursue rewards becomes crucial. Using a risky foraging task, we investigated individual differences in this dynamic across 781 individuals aged 14-24 years who were split into a hypothesis-generating discovery sample and a hold-out confirmation sample. Sex was the most important predictor of cautious behaviour and performance. Males earned one standard deviation (or 20%) more reward than females, collected more reward when there was little to lose and reduced foraging to the same level as females when potential losses became high. Other independent predictors of cautiousness and performance were self-reported daringness, IQ and self-reported cognitive complexity. We found no evidence for an impact of age or maturation. Thus, maleness, a high IQ or self-reported cognitive complexity, and self-reported daringness predicted greater success in risky foraging, possibly due to better exploitation of low-risk opportunities in high-risk environments.
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.