ArticleCognition2022
People adaptively use information to improve their internal states and external outcomes.
Article in Cognition, 2022. 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.
- Exerting effort for non-instrumental information under risk.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Feedback-induced attitudinal changes in risk preferences.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Information seeking and the expected utility of information about COVID-19 can be associated with uncertainty and related attitudes.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Initial Expectations and Confidence Affect the Formation of Novel Self-Beliefs and Their Revision.Open mind : discoveries in cognitive science · 2025Article
- Three diverse motives for information sharing.Communications psychology · 2024Article
- "How" web searches change under stress.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- A neural mechanism for conserved value computations integrating information and rewards.Nature neuroscience · 2024Article
- Multifaceted information-seeking motives in children.Nature communications · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Information can strongly impact people's affect, their level of uncertainty and their decisions. It is assumed that people seek information with the goal of improving all three. But are they successful at achieving this goal? Answering this question is important for assessing the impact of self-driven information consumption on people's well-being. Here, over five experiments (total N = 727) we show that participants accurately predict the impact of information on their internal states (e.g., affect and cognition) and external outcomes (e.g., material rewards), and use these predictions to guide information-seeking choices. A model incorporating participants' subjective expectations regarding the impact of information on their affective, cognitive, and material outcomes accounted for information-seeking choices better than a model that included only objective proxies of those measures. This model also accounted for individual differences in information-seeking choices. By balancing considerations of the impact of information on affective, cognitive and material outcomes when seeking knowledge, participants became happier, more certain and made better decisions when they sought information relative to when they did not, suggesting that the actual consequences of receiving information aligned with their subjective expectations.
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.