ArticleData in brief2024
A behavioral dataset of predictive decisions given trends in information across adulthood.
Article in Data in brief, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Making early and good predictions is a critical feature of decision making in domains such as investing and predicting the spread of diseases. Past literature indicates that people use recent and longer-term trends to extrapolate future outcomes. Nonetheless, less is known about what differentiates the strategies people use to make better predictions than others. Furthermore, factors underlying predictive judgments could be an important behavioral component in psychosocial research investigating manic-depression, anxiety, and age effects. Additionally, predictive judgments may be moderated based on the experience of living in areas with greater income inequality. To address these issues, we used investment tasks where participants had to predict future outcomes of their investments based on a trend in information. In the task, participants predicted how many tokens a gold mine would produce on the twelfth turn. On each turn, participants could ask for more information at a cost, or make a prediction about whether the gold mine would produce more or less than 100 tokens by the 12th turn. The trend was determined by function type (exponential and inverse exponential functions), whether the function was more linear or curved (growth factors), and good or bad outcomes (final values). This paradigm could help disentangle to what degree people use recent or longer-term information to inform their predictive judgments. We used Qualtrics to conduct this study. We also collected questionnaire data quantifying anxiety, impulsivity, risk attitudes, manic-depressive symptoms, and other psychosocial characteristics. The study was administered to adults with age ranges across the lifespan (
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.