Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40729408›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2025

A Bayesian hierarchical model of trial-to-trial fluctuations in decision criterion.

Robin Vloeberghs, Anne E Urai, Kobe Desender, Scott W Linderman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Robin VloeberghsBrain and Cognition, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-0086-8937
Anne E UraiCognitive Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5270-6513
Kobe DesenderBrain and Cognition, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-5462-4260
Scott W LindermanDepartment of Statistics and Wu Tsai Neurosciences Institute, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-3878-9073

Funding

Towards a Unified Framework for Dopamine Signaling in the StriatumU19NS113201 · NINDS · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI SABATINI, BERNARDO L · 2019 to 2023
$18.7M
Neural representation of mating partners by male C. elegansR01NS113119 · NINDS · CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI LINDERMAN, SCOTT WARREN, SAMUEL, ARAVINTHAN D. · 2019 to 2023
$3.3M
Unified, Scalable, and Reproducible Neurostatistical SoftwareRF1MH133778 · NIMH · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY · PI LINDERMAN, SCOTT WARREN, WILLIAMS, ALEXANDER HENRY · 2023 to 2023
$2.2M
Deconstructing the sertonin system in the mouse brainRF1NS131987 · NINDS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI LINDERMAN, SCOTT WARREN, LUO, LIQUN · 2023 to 2023
$2.2M
CRCNS: Deconstructing Dynamics of Motor Cortex in Freely Moving BehaviorR01NS130789 · NINDS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Scott Warren Linderman, Paul Nuyujukian · 2022 to 2026
$2.1M
NIMH NIH HHS RF1 MH133778NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS113119NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS130789NINDS NIH HHS RF1 NS131987NINDS NIH HHS U19 NS113201
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Classical decision models assume that the parameters giving rise to choice behavior are stable, yet emerging research suggests these parameters may fluctuate over time. Such fluctuations, observed in neural activity and behavioral strategies, have significant implications for understanding decision-making processes. However, empirical studies on fluctuating human decision-making strategies have been limited due to the extensive data requirements for estimating these fluctuations. Here, we introduce hMFC (Hierarchical Model for Fluctuations in Criterion), a Bayesian framework designed to estimate slow fluctuations in the decision criterion from limited data. We first showcase the importance of considering fluctuations in decision criterion: incorrectly assuming a stable criterion gives rise to apparent history effects and underestimates perceptual sensitivity. We then present a hierarchical estimation procedure capable of reliably recovering the underlying state of the fluctuating decision criterion with as few as 500 trials per participant, offering a robust tool for researchers with typical human datasets. Critically, hMFC does not only accurately recover the state of the underlying decision criterion, it also effectively deals with the confounds caused by criterion fluctuations. Lastly, we provide code and a comprehensive demo to enable widespread application of hMFC in decision-making research.

Indexed as

Decision MakingAlgorithmsBayes TheoremChoice BehaviorComputational BiologyComputer SimulationHumans

Identifiers

PMID40729408
PMCPMC12367131

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.