Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34047894›Full record

ArticleCognitive processing2021

The cherry effect or the issue behind well-being.

Marko Ćurković, Lucija Svetina, Andro Košec

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive processing, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Marko ĆurkovićUniversity Psychiatric Hospital Vrapče, Bolnička cesta 32, 10 090, Zagreb, Croatia.
Lucija SvetinaDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, University Hospital Center Zagreb, Kišpatićeva 12, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.
Andro KošecSchool of Medicine, University of Zagreb, Šalata 2, 10 000, Zagreb, Croatia. andro.kosec@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7864-2060

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Humans define well-being on predefined assumptions, based on inner and outer criteria as references. As illustrated, these criteria are subject to constant change, even in a situation when one is acting freely and is in control of all possible external influences. Even in scenarios that seemingly allow autonomy with one variable to analyse, underlying "irrationality" affects our ability to define and operationalize any desirable trait or state, such as well-being, euthymia or health. Before eating a bowl full of cherries, one creates an idea of how much cherries he/she will eat. However, as one starts eating, perception and following assumptions change. As cherries labeled as most desirable disappear, other cherries start to appear more alluring. The cherry effect could be of relevance in defining the terms such as well-being, euthymia and basically any other term encompassing a complex category of the human condition dependent on our perceived reality.

Indexed as

Health StatusHumansBiasEuthymiaWell-being

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.