Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38198502›Full record

ArticlePLoS biology2024

The parietal cortex has a causal role in ambiguity computations in humans.

Gabriela Valdebenito-Oyarzo, María Paz Martínez-Molina, Patricia Soto-Icaza, Francisco Zamorano, Alejandra Figueroa-Vargas, Josefina Larraín-Valenzuela, Ximena Stecher, César Salinas, Julien Bastin, Antoni Valero-Cabré and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

12 authors.

Gabriela Valdebenito-OyarzoLaboratorio de Neurociencia Social y Neuromodulación, Centro de Investigación en Complejidad Social, (neuroCICS), Facultad de Gobierno, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile.
María Paz Martínez-MolinaLaboratorio de Neurociencia Social y Neuromodulación, Centro de Investigación en Complejidad Social, (neuroCICS), Facultad de Gobierno, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile.
Patricia Soto-IcazaLaboratorio de Neurociencia Social y Neuromodulación, Centro de Investigación en Complejidad Social, (neuroCICS), Facultad de Gobierno, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile.
Francisco ZamoranoUnidad de Neuroimágenes Cuantitativas avanzadas (UNICA), Departamento de Imágenes, Clínica Alemana de Santiago, Santiago, Chile.
Alejandra Figueroa-VargasLaboratorio de Neurociencia Social y Neuromodulación, Centro de Investigación en Complejidad Social, (neuroCICS), Facultad de Gobierno, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile.
Josefina Larraín-ValenzuelaLaboratorio de Neurociencia Social y Neuromodulación, Centro de Investigación en Complejidad Social, (neuroCICS), Facultad de Gobierno, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile.
Ximena StecherUnidad de Neuroimágenes Cuantitativas avanzadas (UNICA), Departamento de Imágenes, Clínica Alemana de Santiago, Santiago, Chile.
César SalinasUnidad de Neuroimágenes Cuantitativas avanzadas (UNICA), Departamento de Imágenes, Clínica Alemana de Santiago, Santiago, Chile.
Julien BastinUniv. Grenoble Alpes, Inserm, U1216, Grenoble Institut Neurosciences, Grenoble, France.
Antoni Valero-CabréCausal Dynamics, Plasticity and Rehabilitation Group, FRONTLAB team, Institut du Cerveau et de la Moelle Epinière (ICM), CNRS UMR 7225, INSERM U 1127 and Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Rafael PolaniaDecision Neuroscience Lab, Department of Health Sciences and Technology, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Pablo BillekeLaboratorio de Neurociencia Social y Neuromodulación, Centro de Investigación en Complejidad Social, (neuroCICS), Facultad de Gobierno, Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile.ORCID 0000-0003-4261-0678

Funding

Agencia Nacional de Investigación y DesarrolloFondo Nacional de Desarrollo Cientifico y Tecnologico
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Humans often face the challenge of making decisions between ambiguous options. The level of ambiguity in decision-making has been linked to activity in the parietal cortex, but its exact computational role remains elusive. To test the hypothesis that the parietal cortex plays a causal role in computing ambiguous probabilities, we conducted consecutive fMRI and TMS-EEG studies. We found that participants assigned unknown probabilities to objective probabilities, elevating the uncertainty of their decisions. Parietal cortex activity correlated with the objective degree of ambiguity and with a process that underestimates the uncertainty during decision-making. Conversely, the midcingulate cortex (MCC) encodes prediction errors and increases its connectivity with the parietal cortex during outcome processing. Disruption of the parietal activity increased the uncertainty evaluation of the options, decreasing cingulate cortex oscillations during outcome evaluation and lateral frontal oscillations related to value ambiguous probability. These results provide evidence for a causal role of the parietal cortex in computing uncertainty during ambiguous decisions made by humans.

Indexed as

Brain MappingDecision MakingHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingParietal LobeRisk-TakingUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID38198502
PMCPMC10824459

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.