ArticleNature communications2025
Early versus late noise differentially enhances or degrades context-dependent choice.
Article in Nature communications, 2025. 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
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Noise is a fundamental problem for information processing in neural systems. In decision-making, noise is thought to cause stochastic errors in choice. However, little is known about how noise arising from different sources may contribute differently to value coding and choice behaviors. Here, we examine how noise arising early versus late in the decision process differentially impacts context-dependent choice behavior. We find in model simulations that under early noise, contextual information enhances choice accuracy, while under late noise, context degrades choice accuracy. Furthermore, we verify these opposing predictions in experimental human choice behavior. Manipulating early and late noise - by inducing uncertainty in option values and controlling time pressure - produces dissociable positive and negative context effects. These findings reconcile controversial experimental findings in the literature, suggesting a unified mechanism for context-dependent choice. More broadly, these findings highlight how different sources of noise can interact with neural computations to differentially modulate behavior.
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.