ArticleFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience2024
Cognitive mechanisms of learning in sequential decision-making under uncertainty: an experimental and theoretical approach.
Article in Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effectiveness of scaffolded case-based learning in anesthesiology residency training: a randomized controlled trial.BMC medical education · 2025Trial
- A biologically plausible decision-making model based on interacting neural populations.PloS one · 2026Article
- Home-Cage Training for Non-Human Primates: An Opportunity to Reduce Stress and Study Natural Behavior in Neurophysiology Experiments.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Review
- Game theoretic research on strategies for medical carbon neutrality stakeholders under time delay effects.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Learning to make adaptive decisions involves making choices, assessing their consequence, and leveraging this assessment to attain higher rewarding states. Despite vast literature on value-based decision-making, relatively little is known about the cognitive processes underlying decisions in highly uncertain contexts. Real world decisions are rarely accompanied by immediate feedback, explicit rewards, or complete knowledge of the environment. Being able to make informed decisions in such contexts requires significant knowledge about the environment, which can only be gained via exploration. Here we aim at understanding and formalizing the brain mechanisms underlying these processes. To this end, we first designed and performed an experimental task. Human participants had to learn to maximize reward while making sequences of decisions with only basic knowledge of the environment, and in the absence of explicit performance cues. Participants had to rely on their own internal assessment of performance to reveal a covert relationship between their choices and their subsequent consequences to find a strategy leading to the highest cumulative reward. Our results show that the participants' reaction times were longer whenever the decision involved a future consequence, suggesting greater introspection whenever a delayed value had to be considered. The learning time varied significantly across participants. Second, we formalized the neurocognitive processes underlying decision-making within this task, combining mean-field representations of competing neural populations with a reinforcement learning mechanism. This model provided a plausible characterization of the brain dynamics underlying these processes, and reproduced each aspect of the participants' behavior, from their reaction times and choices to their learning rates. In summary, both the experimental results and the model provide a principled explanation to how delayed value may be computed and incorporated into the neural dynamics of decision-making, and to how learning occurs in these uncertain scenarios.
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.