ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2021
Feedback moderates the effect of prevalence on perceptual decisions.
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 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- No stone unturned: Prevalence effects in interactive search are different than those in visual search.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- Age differences in susceptibility to stroke-related health misinformation on social media: the role of prior experience and corrective feedback.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- The joint effect of feedback order and reward schemes on prevalence-induced perceptual decisions.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Effects of prevalence and feedback in the identification of blast cells in peripheral blood: expert and novice observers.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2025Article
- Highly dangerous road hazards are not immune from the low prevalence effect.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2024Article
- Clinical Validation Benchmark Dataset and Expert Performance Baseline for Colorectal Polyp Localization Methods.Journal of imaging · 2023Article
- Taking prevalence effects on the road: Rare hazards are often missed.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2023Article
- How one block of trials influences the next: persistent effects of disease prevalence and feedback on decisions about images of skin lesions in a large online study.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
How does the prevalence of a target influence how it is perceived and categorized? A substantial body of work, mostly in visual search, shows that a higher proportion of targets are missed when prevalence is low. This classic low prevalence effect (LPE) involves a shift to a more conservative decision criterion that makes it less likely that observers will call an ambiguous item a target. In contrast, Levari et al. (Science, 360[6396], 1465-1467, 2018) recently reported the opposite effect in a simple categorization task. In their hands, at low prevalence, observers adopted a more liberal criterion, making observers more likely to label ambiguous dots on a blue-purple continuum "blue." They called this "prevalence-induced concept change" (PICC). Here, we report that the presence or absence of feedback is critical. With feedback, observers become more conservative at low prevalence, as in the LPE. Without feedback, they become more liberal, identifying a wider range of stimuli as targets, as in Levari's PICC studies. Stimuli from a shape continuum ranging from rounded ("Bouba") to bumpy ("Kiki") shapes produced similar results. Other variables: response type (2AFC vs. go/no-go), color (blue-purple vs. red-green), and stimuli type (solid color vs. texture) did not influence the criterion shifts. Understanding these effects of prevalence and ways they can be controlled illuminates the context-specific nature of perceptual decisions and may be useful in socially important, low prevalence tasks like cancer screening, airport security, and disease diagnosis in pathology.
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.