Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40379772›Full record

ArticleCommunications psychology2025

Stability and robustness of idiosyncratic choice bias.

Lior Lebovich, Lea Kaplan, David Hansel, Yonatan Loewenstein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications psychology, 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.

Lior LebovichThe Edmond and Lily Safra Center for Brain Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel. lebovich.lior@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7865-1669
Lea KaplanThe Edmond and Lily Safra Center for Brain Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
David HanselCerebral Dynamics, Plasticity and Learning Laboratory, CNRS, 45 Rue des Saints Pères, 75270, Paris, France.
Yonatan LoewensteinThe Edmond and Lily Safra Center for Brain Sciences, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2577-2317

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A well-known observation in repeated-choice experiments is that a tendency to prefer one response over the others emerges if the feedback consistently favors that response. Choice bias, a tendency to prefer one response over the others, however, is not restricted to biased-feedback settings and is also observed when the feedback is unbiased. In fact, participant-specific choice bias, known as idiosyncratic choice bias (ICB), is common even in symmetrical experimental settings in which feedback is completely absent. Here we ask whether feedback-induced bias and ICB share a common mechanism. Specifically, we ask whether ICBs reflect idiosyncrasies in choice-feedback associations prior to the measurement of the ICB. To address this question, we compared the long-term dynamics of ICBs with feedback-induced biases in two longitudinal experiments involving 319 participants. We show that while feedback effectively induced choice preferences, its effect was transient and diminished within several weeks. By contrast, we show that ICBs remained stable for at least 22 months. These results indicate that different mechanisms underlie the idiosyncratic and feedback-induced biases.

Identifiers

PMID40379772
PMCPMC12084652

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.