Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36163352›Full record

ArticleNature communications2022

A neuro-computational account of procrastination behavior.

Raphaël Le Bouc, Mathias Pessiglione

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Raphaël Le BoucMotivation, Brain and Behavior (MBB) Lab, Paris Brain Institute (ICM), Sorbonne University, Inserm, CNRS, Pitié-Salpêtrière hospital, Paris, France. raphael.lebouc@aphp.fr.ORCID 0000-0001-9982-3645
Mathias PessiglioneMotivation, Brain and Behavior (MBB) Lab, Paris Brain Institute (ICM), Sorbonne University, Inserm, CNRS, Pitié-Salpêtrière hospital, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-6992-3677

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Humans procrastinate despite being aware of potential adverse consequences. Yet, the neuro-computational mechanisms underlying procrastination remain poorly understood. Here, we use fMRI during intertemporal choice to inform a computational model that predicts procrastination behavior in independent tests. Procrastination is assessed in the laboratory as the preference for performing an effortful task on the next day as opposed to immediately, and at home as the delay taken in returning completed administrative forms. These procrastination behaviors are respectively modeled as unitary and repeated decisions to postpone a task until the next time step, based on a net expected value that integrates reward and effort attributes, both discounted with delay. The key feature that is associated with procrastination behavior across individuals (both in-lab and at-home) is the extent to which the expected effort cost (signaled by the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex) is attenuated by the delay before task completion. Thus, procrastination might stem from a cognitive bias that would make doing a task later (compared to now) appear as much less effortful but not much less rewarding.

Indexed as

ProcrastinationChoice BehaviorHumansPrefrontal CortexRewardTime

Identifiers

PMID36163352
PMCPMC9513091

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.