Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33403535›Full record

ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2021

Confidence in risky value-based choice.

Kevin da Silva Castanheira, Stephen M Fleming, A Ross Otto

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Kevin da Silva CastanheiraDepartment of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Stephen M FlemingWellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging and Department of Experimental Psychology, University College London, London, UK.
A Ross OttoDepartment of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada. ross.otto@mcgill.ca.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 206648/Z/17/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Risk engenders a phenomenologically distinct experience from certainty, often driving people to behave in ostensibly irrational ways, and with potential consequences for our subjective sense of confidence in having made the best choice. While previous work on decision confidence has largely focused on ambiguous perceptual decisions or value-based choices under certainty, it is unclear how subjective confidence reports are formed during risky value-based choice (i.e. those with uncertain outcomes). Accordingly, we sought to examine the effect of risky (versus certain) choice upon confidence ratings in a calibrated economic choice task and explore the well-documented interrelationships between confidence and subjective value (SV) as well as choice response time (RT) in the context of value-based choice. By jointly analyzing choices (risky versus certain), SV of the chosen option, confidence, and RT, we found a systematic effect of risk on subjective confidence: subjective confidence reports were significantly higher when selecting a certain prospect compared with a risky one. Interestingly, risk attenuated the strength of the relationships between confidence and both RTs and difference in subjective value (ΔSV), as well as the relationship between RT and ΔSV. Taken together, these results corroborate how choice, RT, confidence and SV relate in value-based choice under risk, informing both theories of confidence and risk preferences.

Indexed as

Risk-TakingAdultChoice BehaviorFemaleHumansMaleMetacognitionReaction TimeUncertaintyYoung AdultConfidenceDecision makingRiskSubjective value

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.