ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2023
How uncertain are you? Disentangling expected and unexpected uncertainty in pupil-linked brain arousal during reversal learning.
Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modality-general sensitivity of pupil responses to regularity violations.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2026Article
- Eye of the beholder: Pupillary response reflects how subjective prior beliefs shape reinforcement learning with fake news.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Article
- Arousal coherence, uncertainty, and well-being: an active inference account.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2024Review
- Expectations regarding school decreases emotional distress among college students in Western China: the buffering role of physical exercises.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During decision making, we are continuously faced with two sources of uncertainty regarding the links between stimuli, our actions, and outcomes. On the one hand, our expectations are often probabilistic, that is, stimuli or actions yield the expected outcome only with a certain probability (expected uncertainty). On the other hand, expectations might become invalid due to sudden, unexpected changes in the environment (unexpected uncertainty). Several lines of research show that pupil-linked brain arousal is a sensitive indirect measure of brain mechanisms underlying uncertainty computations. Thus, we investigated whether it is involved in disentangling these two forms of uncertainty. To this aim, we measured pupil size during a probabilistic reversal learning task. In this task, participants had to figure out which of two response options led to reward with higher probability, whereby sometimes the identity of the more advantageous response option was switched. Expected uncertainty was manipulated by varying the reward probability of the advantageous choice option, whereas the level of unexpected uncertainty was assessed by using a Bayesian computational model estimating change probability and resulting uncertainty. We found that both aspects of unexpected uncertainty influenced pupil responses, confirming that pupil-linked brain arousal is involved in model updating after unexpected changes in the environment. Furthermore, high level of expected uncertainty impeded the detection of sudden changes in the environment, both on physiological and behavioral level. These results emphasize the role of pupil-linked brain arousal and underlying neural structures in handling situations in which the previously established contingencies are no longer valid.
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.