Cited by 125Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesVisual perception and processing mechanismsDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Confidence Is the Bridge between Multi-stage Decisions

Open access
van den Berg, Ronald, Zylberberg, Ariel, Kiani, Roozbeh, Shadlen, Michael N., Wolpert, Daniel M.·2016·Current Biology

Abstract

Demanding tasks often require a series of decisions to reach a goal. Recent progress in perceptual decision-making has served to unite decision accuracy, speed, and confidence in a common framework of bounded evidence accumulation, furnishing a platform for the study of such multi-stage decisions. In many instances, the strategy applied to each decision, such as the speed-accuracy trade-off, ought to depend on the accuracy of the previous decisions. However, as the accuracy of each decision is often unknown to the decision maker, we hypothesized that subjects may carry forward a level of confidence in previous decisions to affect subsequent decisions. Subjects made two perceptual decisions sequentially and were rewarded only if they made both correctly. The speed and accuracy of individual decisions were explained by noisy evidence accumulation to a terminating bound. We found that subjects adjusted their speed-accuracy setting by elevating the termination bound on the second decision in proportion to their confidence in the first. The findings reveal a novel role for confidence and a degree of flexibility, hitherto unknown, in the brain's ability to rapidly and precisely modify the mechanisms that control the termination of a decision.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cub.2016.10.021

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Variation in post-decision confidence predicts how likely the decision is to be revised if an opportunity arises.

    “Variation in post-decision confidence predicts how likely the decision is to be revised if an opportunity arises,9”

    From Two prefrontal-subcortical circuits estimate controllability and reflect its impact on learning (2026) · cites this paper as [10]

    The Introduction and Results > Second of Two Decisions report that confidence after a first decision predicts the speed–accuracy strategy used for a separate, subsequent decision. They do not report whether confidence predicts the likelihood of revising the original decision when given an opportunity. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [27]Jeffreys H. Theory of Probability 1961 Oxford University Press
  2. [28]Shadlen, M.N., Hanks, T.D., Churchland, A.K., Kiani, R., and Yang, T. (2006). Bayesian Brain: Probabilistic Approaches to Neural Coding, K. Doya, S. Ishii, A. Pouget, and R.P.N. Rao, eds. (MIT Press), pp. 209–237.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van den Berg, R., Zylberberg, A., Kiani, R., Shadlen, M. N., & Wolpert, D. M.
Affiliations
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
  • New York University (US)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
Wolpert, Daniel M.
Venue
Current Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-12
Volume
26
Issue
23
Pages
3157-3168
ISSN
0960-9822 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2554642868
Cited by
125
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 9
FWCI
5.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database (submittedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (cc-by)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust
  • Human Frontier Science Program
  • Royal Society
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • National Eye Institute (EY11378)
  • Simons Collaboration on the Global Brain
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
decision confidence, multi-stage decision making, perceptual decision making, evidence accumulation, speed-accuracy trade-off, sequential decision making
MeSH terms
Choice Behavior, Decision Making, Humans, Time Factors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review