ReviewNeuroscience and biobehavioral reviews2022
Filling the gaps: Cognitive control as a critical lens for understanding mechanisms of value-based decision-making.
Review in Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed.
- Automatic value learning results in counterproductive human behavior.Nature communications · 2026Article
- The perils of omitting omissions when modeling evidence accumulation.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Demand avoidance in value-based choice under risk: A behavioral and pupillometric examination.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2026Article
- Misspecified models create the appearance of adaptive control during value-based choice.Communications psychology · 2026Article
- Impaired effort allocation in schizophrenia.Schizophrenia research. Cognition · 2025Article
- Factorized embedding of goal and uncertainty in the lateral prefrontal cortex guides stably flexible learning.Nature communications · 2025Article
- The temporal dynamics of metacognitive experiences track rational adaptations in task performance.Communications psychology · 2025Article
- Dynamic modulation of spatial selection: Online and anticipatory adjustments in the flanker task.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
- Mutual inclusivity improves decision-making by smoothing out choice's competitive edge.Nature human behaviour · 2025Article
- Task representation and individual differences affect strategy selection and problem-solving performance.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- The affective gradient hypothesis: an affect-centered account of motivated behavior.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2024Review
- Subthalamic control of impulsive actions: insights from deep brain stimulation in Parkinson's disease.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2024Review
- Common neural choice signals can emerge artefactually amid multiple distinct value signals.Nature human behaviour · 2024Article
- Mutual inclusivity improves decision-making by smoothing out choice's competitive edge.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Reactive and proactive control processes in voluntary task choice.Memory & cognition · 2024Article
- Reinforcement learning of adaptive control strategies.Communications psychology · 2024Article
- Efficient integration of personal factors into the international classification of functioning, disability, and health (ICF): the importance of emotional and motivational aspects in goal pursuit.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2024Review
- Multiple timescales of temporal context in risky choice: Behavioral identification and relationships to physiological arousal.PloS one · 2024Article
- Learning how to reason and deciding when to decide.The Behavioral and brain sciences · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
While often seeming to investigate rather different problems, research into value-based decision making and cognitive control have historically offered parallel insights into how people select thoughts and actions. While the former studies how people weigh costs and benefits to make a decision, the latter studies how they adjust information processing to achieve their goals. Recent work has highlighted ways in which decision-making research can inform our understanding of cognitive control. Here, we provide the complementary perspective: how cognitive control research has informed understanding of decision-making. We highlight three particular areas of research where this critical interchange has occurred: (1) how different types of goals shape the evaluation of choice options, (2) how people use control to adjust the ways they make their decisions, and (3) how people monitor decisions to inform adjustments to control at multiple levels and timescales. We show how adopting this alternate viewpoint offers new insight into the determinants of both decisions and control; provides alternative interpretations for common neuroeconomic findings; and generates fruitful directions for future research.
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.