ArticleCommunications psychology2026
Stimulation uncertainty reveals distinct mechanisms of sensation seeking and impulsivity.
Article in Communications psychology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sensation-seeking is often described as a tendency to pursue novel and stimulating experiences, yet such options are often uncertain as well. This creates a central ambiguity where choices that appear to reflect attraction to stimulation may instead reflect tolerance of uncertain outcomes, or an interaction between the two. Across two experiments, we tested how expected stimulation and stimulation uncertainty shape reward-guided choice. A reanalysis of a previous operant sensation-seeking dataset suggests that stimulation uncertainty explained behaviour better than expected stimulation. Subsequently, we conducted a preregistered online experiment to investigate the joint effects of expected stimulation and stimulation uncertainty and to compare their respective associations with sensation-seeking and impulsivity. Our results indicate that higher sensation-seeking was associated with broader stochastic sampling and lower reward performance, but this was not reducible to random choice or uncertainty tolerance alone. Instead, uncertainty weighting depended on the value assigned to expected stimulation. This profile differed from impulsivity, suggesting that the two traits shape choice through distinct computational routes. By separating expected stimulation from uncertainty, these findings refine accounts of exploratory choice by showing that sensation-seeking shapes not only how much people sample uncertain options, but how stimulation value and uncertainty are jointly weighted during choice.
Identifiers
42919841What 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.