Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39048689›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Efficiency in redundancy.

Quentin F Gronau, Rani Moran, Ami Eidels

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Quentin F GronauSchool of Psychological Sciences, The University of Newcastle, 2308 Callaghan Campus, Callaghan, NSW, Australia. Quentin.F.Gronau@gmail.com.
Rani MoranSchool of Biological and Behavioural Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, Max Planck UCL Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing, University College London (UCL), London, UK.
Ami EidelsSchool of Psychological Sciences, The University of Newcastle, 2308 Callaghan Campus, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In engineering, redundancy is the duplication of vital systems for use in the event of failure. In studies of human cognition, redundancy often refers to the duplication of the signal. Scores of studies have shown the salutary effects of a combined auditory and visual signal over single modality, the advantage of processing complete faces over facial features, and more recently the advantage of two observers over one. But what if the signal (or the number of observers) is fixed and cannot be altered or augmented? Can people improve the efficiency of information processing by recruiting an additional, redundant system? Here we demonstrate that recruiting a second redundant system can, under reasonable assumptions about human capacity, result in improved performance. Recruiting a second redundant system may come with a higher energy cost, but may be worthwhile in high-stakes situations where processing information accurately is crucial.

Indexed as

CognitionHumansCognitive systemDecision makingInformation processing

Identifiers

PMID39048689
PMCPMC11269681

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.