ArticleeLife2021
Optimal policy for attention-modulated decisions explains human fixation behavior.
Article in eLife, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
- Attention modulates value normalization in human reinforcement learning by shaping reward encoding.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Active Sensing Subserves Task-Level Control.ArXiv · 2026Article
- Learning to select computations in recurrent neural circuits.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Human decision-makers terminate evidence accumulation using flexible decision rules.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Research on metabolic characteristics of multiple sclerosis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Misspecified models create the appearance of adaptive control during value-based choice.Communications psychology · 2026Article
- Behavioral Signatures of Post-Decisional Attention in Preferential Choice.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Early versus late noise differentially enhances or degrades context-dependent choice.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Decision makers consider all options in choice triplets.PloS one · 2025Article
- Considering What We Know and What We Don't Know: Expectations and Confidence Guide Value Integration in Value-Based Decision-Making.Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science · 2025Article
- Common neural choice signals can emerge artefactually amid multiple distinct value signals.Nature human behaviour · 2024Article
- Establishing gaze markers of perceptual load during multi-target visual search.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2023Article
- Learning how to reason and deciding when to decide.The Behavioral and brain sciences · 2023Article
- Complex economic decisions from simple neurocognitive processes: the role of interactive attention.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Vigilance, arousal, and acetylcholine: Optimal control of attention in a simple detection task.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- Article
- Rational use of cognitive resources in human planning.Nature human behaviour · 2022Article
- Gaze-dependent evidence accumulation predicts multi-alternative risky choice behaviour.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Traditional accumulation-to-bound decision-making models assume that all choice options are processed with equal attention. In real life decisions, however, humans alternate their visual fixation between individual items to efficiently gather relevant information (Yang et al., 2016). These fixations also causally affect one's choices, biasing them toward the longer-fixated item (Krajbich et al., 2010). We derive a normative decision-making model in which attention enhances the reliability of information, consistent with neurophysiological findings (Cohen and Maunsell, 2009). Furthermore, our model actively controls fixation changes to optimize information gathering. We show that the optimal model reproduces fixation-related choice biases seen in humans and provides a Bayesian computational rationale for this phenomenon. This insight led to additional predictions that we could confirm in human data. Finally, by varying the relative cognitive advantage conferred by attention, we show that decision performance is benefited by a balanced spread of resources between the attended and unattended items.
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.