ArticleComputational brain & behavior2025
Overt Visual Attention in the Formation of Preference Between Complex Lottery Options.
Article in Computational brain & behavior, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The role of attention in multi attribute decision making.Nature communications · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our ultimate goal is to understand mechanisms of decision-making, a fundamental cognitive function. Models of multi-attribute decision-making vary on whether preference formation is based on within-option or within-attribute processing. We carry out a combined empirical and computational study using lottery options with varying task complexities. We monitor eye gaze during the decision formation to determine which decision-relevant information participants attend and when. We compare models of different levels of complexity in their ability to account for the choices made by individual participants. We find that two models outperform all others. The first is the two-layer leaky-competing accumulator based on prospect theory (LCA-PT), which predicts human choices on simple tasks better than any other model. For complex tasks a new model based on operations research performs best, with both its performance as well as that of the second-ranked LCA-PT model significantly exceeding that of all other models. Both models use the sequence of observed eye movements for each participant to capture the allocation of attention to specific options and attributes during the decision process, but make different assumptions about the effect of attention on decision-making. Our results suggest that, when faced with complex choice problems, people form preferences primarily based on attention-guided pairwise, within-attribute value comparisons. Suboptimal decisions are at the basis of many societal ills, from drug abuse to eating disorders to displaying inappropriately violent behavior. Understanding their underlying mechanisms has the potential of developing remedies for these maladaptive behaviors. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42113-025-00239-7.
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.