Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40035520›Full record

ArticlePerspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science2025

Noise in Cognition: Bug or Feature?

Adam N Sanborn, Jian-Qiao Zhu, Jake Spicer, Pablo León-Villagrá, Lucas Castillo, Johanna K Falbén, Yun-Xiao Li, Aidan Tee, Nick Chater

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

9 authors.

Adam N SanbornDepartment of Psychology, University of Warwick.ORCID 0000-0003-0442-4372
Jian-Qiao ZhuDepartment of Psychology, University of Warwick.
Jake SpicerDepartment of Psychology, University of Warwick.ORCID 0000-0001-9531-6216
Pablo León-VillagráDepartment of Psychology, University of Warwick.
Lucas CastilloDepartment of Psychology, University of Warwick.ORCID 0000-0003-0274-0777
Johanna K FalbénDepartment of Psychology, University of Warwick.
Yun-Xiao LiDepartment of Psychology, University of Warwick.ORCID 0000-0002-3509-6618
Aidan TeeDepartment of Psychology, University of Warwick.
Nick ChaterWarwick Business School, University of Warwick.ORCID 0000-0002-9745-0686

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Noise in behavior is often considered a nuisance: Although the mind aims for the best possible action, it is let down by unreliability in the sensory and response systems. Researchers often represent noise as additive, Gaussian, and independent. Yet a careful look at behavioral noise reveals a rich structure that defies easy explanation. First, in both perceptual and preferential judgments sensory and response noise may potentially play only minor roles, with most noise arising in the cognitive computations. Second, the functional form of the noise is both non-Gaussian and nonindependent, with the distribution of noise being better characterized as heavy-tailed and as having substantial long-range autocorrelations. It is possible that this structure results from brains that are, for some reason, bedeviled by a fundamental design flaw, albeit one with intriguingly distinctive characteristics. Alternatively, noise might not be a bug but a feature. Specifically, we propose that the brain approximates probabilistic inference with a local sampling algorithm, one using randomness to drive its exploration of alternative hypotheses. Reframing cognition in this way explains the rich structure of noise and leads to the surprising conclusion that noise is not a symptom of cognitive malfunction but plays a central role in underpinning human intelligence.

Indexed as

BrainCognitionHumanscognitionnoiseperceptionsampling processvariability

Identifiers

PMID40035520
PMCPMC12065952

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.