ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
Persisting inhibition biases efficient rule inference under uncertainty.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Task set inhibition supports optimal switching among tasks by actively suppressing the interference from recently executed competing task sets. It is typically studied in cued task-switching paradigms where there is no uncertainty about the task set or rule to prepare for on each trial. While inhibition has been shown to influence the speed and the accuracy of task execution, affecting task set retrieval, preparation, or implementation in conditions of task set switching, it remains uninvestigated whether it also affects rule selection under uncertainty. Methods: We implemented an ad-hoc four-rule card sorting task and categorized the rules selected by participants after a rule shift according to the recency of their last usage. We included a measure of working memory capacity (WMC) to control for its involvement in the rule selection process. Results: Participants exhibited a reduced preference for recently abandoned rules than less recently abandoned ones. Furthermore, we found that such a preference was not associated with WMC. Discussion: The results suggest that decision-making processes underlying rule inference and selection may be influenced by task-set inhibition, configuring as a conflict adjustment mechanism to the sequential history of rules application.
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.