Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38026228›Full record

ArticleiScience2023

Boundary updating as a source of history effect on decision uncertainty.

Heeseung Lee, Sang-Hun Lee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in iScience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Heeseung LeeDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Seoul National University, 1 Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul 08826, Republic of Korea.
Sang-Hun LeeDepartment of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Seoul National University, 1 Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul 08826, Republic of Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When sorting a sequence of stimuli into binary classes, current choices are often negatively correlated with recent stimulus history. This phenomenon-dubbed the repulsive bias-can be explained by boundary updating, a process of shifting the class boundary to previous stimuli. This explanation implies that recent stimulus history can also influence "decision uncertainty," the probability of making incorrect decisions, because it depends on the location of the boundary. However, there have been no previous efforts to elucidate the impact of previous stimulus history on decision uncertainty. Here, from the boundary-updating process that accounts for the repulsive bias, we derived a prediction that decision uncertainty increases as current choices become more congruent with previous stimuli. We confirmed this prediction in behavioral, physiological, and neural correlates of decision uncertainty. Our work demonstrates that boundary updating offers a principled account of how previous stimulus history concurrently relates to choice bias and decision uncertainty.

Indexed as

Behavioral neuroscienceBiological sciencesNeuroscience

Identifiers

PMID38026228
PMCPMC10665832

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.