Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39854872›Full record

ReviewDevelopmental cognitive neuroscience2025

Interpretation of individual differences in computational neuroscience using a latent input approach.

Jessica V Schaaf, Steven Miletić, Anna C K van Duijvenvoorde, Hilde M Huizenga

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Developmental cognitive neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Jessica V SchaafCognitive Neuroscience Department, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands. Electronic address: jessica.schaaf@radboudumc.nl.
Steven MiletićCognitive Psychology Unit, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, the Netherlands; Integrative Model-Based Cognitive Neuroscience Unit, Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Electronic address: s.miletic@fsw.leidenuniv.nl.
Anna C K van DuijvenvoordeDevelopmental and Educational Psychology Unit, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, the Netherlands. Electronic address: a.c.k.van.duijvenvoorde@fsw.leidenuniv.nl.
Hilde M HuizengaDepartment of Developmental Psychology, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Electronic address: h.m.huizenga@uva.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Computational neuroscience offers a valuable opportunity to understand the neural mechanisms underlying behavior. However, interpreting individual differences in these mechanisms, such as developmental differences, is less straightforward. We illustrate this challenge through studies that examine individual differences in reinforcement learning. In these studies, a computational model generates an individual-specific prediction error regressor to model activity in a brain region of interest. Individual differences in the resulting regression weight are typically interpreted as individual differences in neural coding. We first demonstrate that the absence of individual differences in neural coding is not problematic, as such differences are already captured in the individual specific regressor. We then review that the presence of individual differences is typically interpreted as individual differences in the use of brain resources. However, through simulations, we illustrate that these differences could also stem from other factors such as the standardization of the prediction error, individual differences in brain networks outside the region of interest, individual differences in the duration of the prediction error response, individual differences in outcome valuation, and in overlooked individual differences in computational model parameters or the type of computational model. To clarify these interpretations, we provide several recommendations. In this manner we aim to advance the understanding and interpretation of individual differences in computational neuroscience.

Indexed as

BrainIndividualityModels, NeurologicalNeurosciencesReinforcement, PsychologyComputer SimulationHumansComputational neuroscienceDevelopmental neuroscienceIndividual differencesModel selection

Identifiers

PMID39854872
PMCPMC11804603

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.