ArticleeLife2025
The value of initiating a pursuit in temporal decision-making.
Article in eLife, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Reward-reset interval timing drives patch foraging decisions through neural state transitions in dorsomedial striatum.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Reward-rate maximization is a prominent normative principle in behavioral ecology, neuroscience, economics, and AI. Here, we identify, compare, and analyze equations to maximize reward rate when assessing whether to initiate a pursuit. In deriving expressions for the value of a pursuit, we show that time's cost consists of both apportionment and opportunity cost. Reformulating value as a discounting function, we show precisely how a reward-rate-optimal agent's discounting function (1) combines hyperbolic and linear components reflecting apportionment and opportunity costs, and (2) is dependent not only on the considered pursuit's properties but also on time spent and rewards obtained outside the pursuit. This analysis reveals how purported signs of suboptimal behavior (hyperbolic discounting, and the Delay, Magnitude, and Sign effects) are in fact consistent with reward-rate maximization. To better account for observed decision-making errors in humans and animals, we then analyze the impact of misestimating reward-rate-maximizing parameters and find that suboptimal decisions likely stem from errors in assessing time's apportionment-specifically, underweighting time spent outside versus inside a pursuit-which we term the 'Malapportionment Hypothesis'. This understanding of the true pattern of temporal decision-making errors is essential to deducing the learning algorithms and representational architectures actually used by humans and animals.
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.