Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35834438›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2022

If you don't let it in, you don't have to get it out: Thought preemption as a method to control unwanted thoughts.

Isaac Fradkin, Eran Eldar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Isaac FradkinDepartment of Psychology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.ORCID 0000-0002-6387-1941
Eran EldarDepartment of Psychology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.ORCID 0000-0001-8988-6124

Funding

Neurocomputational studies of mood-related momentum dynamics linking reward learning, valuation and responsivityR01MH124092 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI DOMBROVSKI, ALEXANDRE Y., ELDAR, ERAN PLAYFAIR · 2020 to 2024
$5.3M
CRCNS US-Israel Research Proposal: Computational Phenotyping of Decision Making in Adolescent PsychopathologyR01MH125564 · NIMH · PRINCETON UNIVERSITY · PI NIV, YAEL · 2020 to 2024
$1.3M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH124092NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH125564
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To attain goals, people must proactively prevent interferences and react to interferences once they occur. Whereas most research focuses on how people deal with external interferences, here we investigate the use of proactive and reactive control in dealing with unwanted thoughts. To examine this question, we asked people to generate an association to each of several repeating cue words, while forbidding the repetition of associations. Reactively rejecting and replacing unwanted repeated associations after they occur entails slower response times. Conversely, proactive control entails constricting the search space and thus faster response times. To gain further insight into different potential proactive thought control mechanisms, we augmented the analysis of raw response times with a novel, hypothesis-based, tractable computational model describing how people serially sample associations. Our results indicate that people primarily react to unwanted thoughts after they occur. Yet, we found evidence for two latent proactive control mechanisms: one that allows people to mitigate the episodic strengthening of repeated thoughts, and another that helps avoid looping in a repetitive thought. Exploratory analysis showed a relationship between model parameters and self-reported individual differences in the control over unwanted thoughts in daily life. The findings indicate the novel task and model can advance our understanding of how people can and cannot control their thoughts and memories, and benefit future research on the mechanisms responsible for unwanted thought in different psychiatric conditions. Finally, we discuss implications concerning the involvement of associative thinking and various control processes in semantic fluency, decision-making and creativity.

Indexed as

CognitionSemanticsHumansReaction TimeSelf Report

Identifiers

PMID35834438
PMCPMC9282588

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.