ArticleiScience2026
Adaptive generalization and efficient learning under uncertainty.
Article in iScience, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
People often use recognizable features to infer the value of novel consumables. This "generalization" strategy is known to be beneficial in stable environments, such that individuals can use previously learned rules and values in efficiently exploring new situations. However, it remains unclear whether and how individuals adjust their generalization strategy in volatile environments where previously learned information becomes obsolete. We hypothesized that individuals adaptively use generalization by continuously updating their beliefs about the credibility of the feature-based reward generalization model at each state. Our data showed that participants used generalization more when the novel environment remained consistent with the previously learned monotonic association between feature and reward, suggesting efficient utilization of previously acquired knowledge. Against other accounts, we found that individuals incorporated an arbitration mechanism between feature-based value generalization and model-based learning, accounting for volatility of the environment. Notably, our suggested model captured differential impacts of generalization dependent on the context-volatility, such that individuals who were biased the most toward generalization showed the smallest learning errors when the value of stimuli are generalized along the recognizable feature, but showed the largest errors in a volatile environment. This work provides novel insights into the adaptive usage of generalization, orchestrating two distinctive learning mechanisms through monitoring their credibility, and highlights the potential adverse effects of overgeneralization in volatile contexts.
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.