ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2021
Neural Mechanisms of Human Decision-Making.
Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multisession transcranial direct current stimulation and aerobic exercise synergistically improve food craving symptoms, impulsivity, and cognitive flexibility in women with overweight and obesity: a randomized controlled trial.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2025Trial
- Implementation of active methodologies: a six-phase instructional design model from a neuroeducational perspective.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
- Serotonergic Signaling GovernseNeuro · 2025Article
- Dual-task effects of walking-speed on inhibitory control and decision-making under risk.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Disciplinary barriers need communication: a behavioral and fNIRS study under group decision-making paradigm shift based on cabin design.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- Unraveling the Mysteries of Motivation.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2020Review
- How Sequential Interactive Processing Within Frontostriatal Loops Supports a Continuum of Habitual to Controlled Processing.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We present a theory and neural network model of the neural mechanisms underlying human decision-making. We propose a detailed model of the interaction between brain regions, under a proposer-predictor-actor-critic framework. This theory is based on detailed animal data and theories of action-selection. Those theories are adapted to serial operation to bridge levels of analysis and explain human decision-making. Task-relevant areas of cortex propose a candidate plan using fast, model-free, parallel neural computations. Other areas of cortex and medial temporal lobe can then predict likely outcomes of that plan in this situation. This optional prediction- (or model-) based computation can produce better accuracy and generalization, at the expense of speed. Next, linked regions of basal ganglia act to accept or reject the proposed plan based on its reward history in similar contexts. If that plan is rejected, the process repeats to consider a new option. The reward-prediction system acts as a critic to determine the value of the outcome relative to expectations and produce dopamine as a training signal for cortex and basal ganglia. By operating sequentially and hierarchically, the same mechanisms previously proposed for animal action-selection could explain the most complex human plans and decisions. We discuss explanations of model-based decisions, habitization, and risky behavior based on the computational model.
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.