Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39242926›Full record

ArticleCommunications psychology2024

The online metacognitive control of decisions.

Juliette Bénon, Douglas Lee, William Hopper, Morgan Verdeil, Mathias Pessiglione, Fabien Vinckier, Sebastien Bouret, Marion Rouault, Raphael Lebouc, Giovanni Pezzulo and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Self-Reflection Protects Behavior from Volatile Beliefs Linked to Paranoia.Computational psychiatry (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

13 authors.

Juliette BénonParis Brain Institute, Paris, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-6084-8003
Douglas LeeSchool of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5892-8694
William HopperParis Brain Institute, Paris, France.
Morgan VerdeilParis Brain Institute, Paris, France.
Mathias PessiglioneParis Brain Institute, Paris, France.
Fabien VinckierParis Brain Institute, Paris, France.
Sebastien BouretParis Brain Institute, Paris, France.
Marion RouaultParis Brain Institute, Paris, France.
Raphael LeboucParis Brain Institute, Paris, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9982-3645
Giovanni PezzuloInstitute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies, Rome, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6813-8282
Christiane SchreiweisParis Brain Institute, Paris, France.
Eric BurguièreParis Brain Institute, Paris, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9690-5909
Jean DaunizeauParis Brain Institute, Paris, France. jean.daunizeau@icm-institute.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9142-1270

Funding

Agence Nationale de la Recherche (French National Research Agency) ANR-xx-ICM-DECIMOTIV
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Difficult decisions typically involve mental effort, which scales with the deployment of cognitive (e.g., mnesic, attentional) resources engaged in processing decision-relevant information. But how does the brain regulate mental effort? A possibility is that the brain optimizes a resource allocation problem, whereby the amount of invested resources balances its expected cost (i.e. effort) and benefit. Our working assumption is that subjective decision confidence serves as the benefit term of the resource allocation problem, hence the "metacognitive" nature of decision control. Here, we present a computational model for the online metacognitive control of decisions or oMCD. Formally, oMCD is a Markov Decision Process that optimally solves the ensuing resource allocation problem under agnostic assumptions about the inner workings of the underlying decision system. We demonstrate how this makes oMCD a quasi-optimal control policy for a broad class of decision processes, including -but not limited to- progressive attribute integration. We disclose oMCD's main properties (in terms of choice, confidence and response time), and show that they reproduce most established empirical results in the field of value-based decision making. Finally, we discuss the possible connections between oMCD and most prominent neurocognitive theories about decision control and mental effort regulation.

Identifiers

PMID39242926
PMCPMC11332065

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.