ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026
Human decision-makers terminate evidence accumulation using flexible decision rules.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2026. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Decisions based on evidence accumulated over time require rules governing when to end the accumulation process and commit to a choice. These rules control inherent trade-offs between decision speed and accuracy, which require careful balance to maximize quantities that depend on both like reward rate. We previously showed that, to maximize reward rate, normative decision rules adapt to changing task conditions (Barendregt et al., 2022). Here we used a novel task to examine whether and how people use adaptive rules for individual decisions under a variety of conditions, including changes in decision outcomes across trials and changes in evidence quality both across and within trials. We found that the participants tended to use rules that adjusted, at least partially, to predictable changes in task conditions to improve reward rate, consistent with a rationally bounded implementation of normative principles. These findings help inform our understanding of the extent and limits of flexible decision formation in the brain.
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.