ArticleNature communications2024
Surprising sounds influence risky decision making.
Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-term pop music exposure impairs production and reproductive performance in laying hens via neural and oxidative stress pathways.Poultry science · 2026Article
- Urban noise-induced stress and decision-making: effects of high-intensity acoustic exposure on risk-based and intertemporal choices.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Random behavior is stable across tasks and time.Journal of experimental psychology. General · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Adaptive behavior depends on appropriate responses to environmental uncertainty. Incidental sensory events might simply be distracting and increase errors, but alternatively can lead to stereotyped responses despite their irrelevance. To evaluate these possibilities, we test whether task-irrelevant sensory prediction errors influence risky decision making in humans across seven experiments (total n = 1600). Rare auditory sequences preceding option presentation systematically increase risk taking and decrease choice perseveration (i.e., increased tendency to switch away from previously chosen options). The risk-taking and perseveration effects are dissociable by manipulating auditory statistics: when rare sequences end on standard tones, including when rare sequences consist only of standard tones, participants are less likely to perseverate after rare sequences but not more likely to take risks. Computational modeling reveals that these effects cannot be explained by increased decision noise but can be explained by value-independent risky bias and perseveration parameters, decision biases previously linked to dopamine. Control experiments demonstrate that both surprise effects can be eliminated when tone sequences are presented in a balanced or fully predictable manner, and that surprise effects cannot be explained by erroneous beliefs. These findings suggest that incidental sounds may influence many of the decisions we make in daily life.
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.