ArticlePsychological review2025
Non-decision time: The Higgs Boson of decision.
Article in Psychological review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Histamine shapes the neurocomputational dynamics of human learning.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Footstep sounds influence bistable biological motion perception.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
- A reinforcement learning and sequential sampling model constrained by gaze data.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Associative and categorical priming in a word-picture paradigm: a diffusion model analysis.Psychological research · 2026Article
- Proximal procrastination of saccades: "paradoxical" delays to larger objects explained by a simple payoff-time heuristic.iScience · 2026Article
- Spatiotemporal Evidence Accumulation Through Saccadic Sampling for Object Recognition.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Factorial variation of saccade vigor with dual decision processes.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Inhibition and updating share common resources: Bayesian evidence from signal detection theory and drift diffusion model.Psychological research · 2025Article
- Acute effects of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol on computational measures of neurocognitive processes are related to recent cannabis use among adolescents and young adults.Frontiers in adolescent medicine · 2025Article
- Saccadic "inhibition" unveils the late influence of image content on oculomotor programming.Experimental brain research · 2024Article
- Composite reaction time and variability correlate with whole-brain white-matter characteristics.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)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
Abstract
Generative models of decision now permeate all subfields of psychology, cognitive, and clinical neuroscience. To successfully investigate decision mechanisms from behavior, it is necessary to assume the presence of delays prior and after the decision process itself. However, directly observing this "non-decision time (NDT)" from behavior long appeared beyond reach, the field mainly relying on models to estimate it. Here, we propose a biological definition of decision that includes perceptual discrimination and action selection, and in turn, explicitly equates NDT with the minimum sensorimotor delay, or "deadtime." We show how this delay is directly observable in behavioral data, without modeling assumptions, using the visual interference approach. We apply this approach to 11 novel and archival data sets from humans and monkeys gathered from multiple labs. We validate the method by showing that visual properties (brightness, color, size) consistently affect empirically measured visuomotor deadtime (VMDT), as predicted by neurophysiology. We then show that endogenous factors (strategic slowing, attention) do not affect VMDT. Therefore, VMDT consistently satisfies widespread selective influence assumptions, in contrast to NDT parameters from model fits. Last, contrasting empirically observed VMDT with NDT estimates from the EZ, drift diffusion, and linear ballistic accumulator models, we conclude that NDT parameters from these models are unlikely to consistently reflect visuomotor delays, neither at a group level nor for individual differences, in contrast to a widely held assumption. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
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.