ArticleeLife2026
Two time scales of adaptation in human learning rates.
Article in eLife, 2026. 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.
- Modulation of error sensitivity during motor learning across time, space and environment variability.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Different situations may require radically different information updating speeds (i.e., learning rates). Some demand fast learning rates while others benefit from using slower ones. To adjust learning rates, decision makers could rely on either global, meta-learned differences between environments, or faster but transient adaptations to locally experienced prediction errors. Here, we introduce a new paradigm that allows researchers to measure and empirically disentangle both forms of adaptation. Participants performed short blocks of trials of a continuous estimation task - fishing for crabs - on six different islands that required different optimal (initial) learning rates. Across two experiments, participants showed fast adaptations in learning rate within a block. Critically, participants also learned global environment-specific learning rates over the time course of the experiment, as evidenced by computational modelling and by the learning rates calculated on the very first trial when revisiting an environment (i.e., unconfounded by transient adaptations). Using representational similarity analyses of fMRI data, we found that differences in voxel pattern responses in the central orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) correlated with differences in these global environment-specific learning rates. Our findings show that humans adapt learning rates at both slow and fast time scales, and that the central OFC may support meta-learning by representing environment-specific task-relevant features such as learning rates.
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.