Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42510200›Full record

ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026

How Outcome Framing and Feedback Influence Decision Patterns over Time.

Maria Paula Armenta, Sébastien Hélie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 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

2 authors.

Maria Paula ArmentaDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA.
Sébastien HélieDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2854-6198

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While loss aversion is a well-established phenomenon, less is known about how repeated feedback in gain or loss contexts changes effortful decisions over time. We hypothesized that repeated loss framing may reduce the willingness to take risks to avoid losses. To test this hypothesis, participants completed 108 trials in which they chose between performing an easy or a difficult task. The task was to stop a stopwatch as close as possible to three seconds. The hard task demanded greater precision and had a lower probability of success compared to the easy task. After each trial, participants received feedback on their performance and points, and at the end of the experiment, they rated their frustration level. Half the participants were randomly assigned to a gain condition while the remaining were assigned to a loss condition. In the gain condition, participants started with zero points and earned points after each trial. In the loss condition, participants began with a set number of points and lost points after each trial. Results showed that participants in the loss condition initially chose the hard task more frequently than those in the gain condition but gradually shifted toward the easy task over time. Participants in the loss condition also reported higher frustration levels at the end of the experiment. These findings suggest that framing and feedback-based learning may jointly shape how people balance effort, risk, and affect across repeated decisions.

Indexed as

effortful decision-makingloss aversionoutcome framingrisk-taking

Identifiers

PMID42510200
PMCPMC13406027

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.