Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35210465›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Experienced entropy drives choice behavior in a boring decision-making task.

Johannes P-H Seiler, Ohad Dan, Oliver Tüscher, Yonatan Loewenstein, Simon Rumpel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

5 authors.

Johannes P-H Seiler *Institute of Physiology, Focus Program Translational Neurosciences (FTN), University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Hanns-Dieter-Hüsch-Weg 19, 55131, Mainz, Germany. johseile@uni-mainz.de.
Ohad Dan *Department of Comparative Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, 06520, USA.
Oliver TüscherDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Untere Zahlbacher Straße 8, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
Yonatan LoewensteinThe Alexander Silberman Institute of Life Sciences, Department of Cognitive Sciences, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 9190401, Jerusalem, Israel.
Simon RumpelInstitute of Physiology, Focus Program Translational Neurosciences (FTN), University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Hanns-Dieter-Hüsch-Weg 19, 55131, Mainz, Germany. sirumpel@uni-mainz.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Boredom has been defined as an aversive mental state that is induced by the disability to engage in satisfying activity, most often experienced in monotonous environments. However, current understanding of the situational factors inducing boredom and driving subsequent behavior remains incomplete. Here, we introduce a two-alternative forced-choice task coupled with sensory stimulation of different degrees of monotony. We find that human subjects develop a bias in decision-making, avoiding the more monotonous alternative that is correlated with self-reported state boredom. This finding was replicated in independent laboratory and online experiments and proved to be specific for the induction of boredom rather than curiosity. Furthermore, using theoretical modeling we show that the entropy in the sequence of individually experienced stimuli, a measure of information gain, serves as a major determinant to predict choice behavior in the task. With this, we underline the relevance of boredom for driving behavioral responses that ensure a lasting stream of information to the brain.

Indexed as

BoredomDecision MakingEntropyAttentionAutomobile DrivingBiasBrainChoice BehaviorHumans

Identifiers

PMID35210465
PMCPMC8873446

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.