ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2026
Toward the cognitive modeling of dynamic decision making.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although most research into risky decision making has focused on simple scenarios - where isolated choices are made independent of one another - many important decisions in life play out across sequences of interdependent events and actions. Despite the ubiquity and importance of such decision problems, we know relatively little about how people manage the complexities of dynamic, multistage decisions. Our work combines techniques from two research traditions to investigate how people handle the challenges of dynamic decision making. We use true-and-error models to estimate the distribution and stability of preference profiles, and the presence of errors. In a complementary analysis we use cognitive modeling based on the Decision Field Theory to investigate the psychological processes underlying dynamic decision making. Decision Field Theory provides a unified framework for testing competing hypotheses about how people collect information and plan for the future. Results from both sets of analyses identify distinct groups of individuals. We discuss the behavioral and cognitive factors distinguishing groups from one another, including degree of planning, strategy shifts, biased information sampling, and effort-saving information processing.
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.