Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42371927›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Learning in a noisy world: How lucky successes and unlucky failures shape learning consequences.

Amanda Zaidan Chen, Martha Jeong, Michele Rigolizzo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Amanda Zaidan ChenDepartment of Management, The Hong Kong University of Science & Technology, Hong Kong.
Martha JeongDepartment of Management, The Hong Kong University of Science & Technology, Hong Kong.ORCID 0000-0001-6370-664X
Michele RigolizzoDepartment of Management, Montclair State University, Montclair, New Jersey, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0943-5943

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Learning is noisy. People can face unlucky failure, in which they fail despite using effective strategies, or experience lucky success, in which they succeed in spite of using suboptimal strategies. Both situations can serve as potentially valuable learning opportunities, as long as performance outcomes are interpreted accurately. This report examines people's ability to recognize and adjust for these errors during the learning process. Our pilot data demonstrated that people assumed that noise affected failure at greater rates, and thereby believed successful outcomes were more informative learning cues. Based on these findings, our research aims to investigate whether experiencing a lucky success is more detrimental to future learning than experiencing unlucky failure, especially when it occurs at the beginning of a learning process. In other words, we seek to understand whether learners sufficiently discount the role of noise in successful outcomes or place too much weight on the informative value of their success, thereby hindering their learning when these outcomes are noisy.

Indexed as

LearningHumans

Identifiers

PMID42371927
PMCPMC13313345

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.