Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42774493›Full record

ArticleComputational brain & behavior2026

Imprecision Can Promote Illusions of Understanding.

Julia M Haaf, Nicole Cruz, Anne Giacobello

Abstract readLetter
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Computational brain & behavior, 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.

Julia M HaafDepartment of Psychology, University of Potsdam, Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 24-25, Potsdam, 14476 Brandenburg Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5122-706X
Nicole CruzDepartment of Psychology, University of Potsdam, Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 24-25, Potsdam, 14476 Brandenburg Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7354-7785
Anne GiacobelloDepartment of Psychology, University of Potsdam, Karl-Liebknecht-Str. 24-25, Potsdam, 14476 Brandenburg Germany.ORCID 0009-0005-2759-6734

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The essay by Shiffrin, Stigler, and Keil (2026) opens a valuable discussion on the limitations of understanding in scientific practice and theory development. Here, we argue that the essay sometimes lacks precision, which in itself may nurture illusions of understanding. The goal of this commentary is therefore to more precisely discuss three themes from the essay: Regression to the mean, the critique of formal modeling, and the nature of researchers' limitations. We end with a brief outlook on how illusions of understanding could be mitigated.

Indexed as

Multilevel modelingTeam scienceUnderstanding

Identifiers

PMID42774493
PMCPMC13593980

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.