Cited by 2Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesMotor Control and Adaptation

Blaming luck, claiming skill: Self-attribution bias in error assignment

Open access
Okamoto, Naoyuki, Taylor, Michael, Kubo, Takatomi, Ishii, Shin, De Martino, Benedetto, Cortese, Aurelio·2025·PLOS Computational Biology

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Mistakes are valuable learning opportunities, yet in uncertain environments, whether a lack of reward is due to poor performance or bad luck can be hard to tell. To investigate how humans address this issue, we developed a visuomotor task where rewards depended on either skill or chance. Participants consistently displayed a self-attribution bias, crediting successes to their own ability while blaming failures on randomness, an effect that influenced their subsequent decisions. Computational modelling revealed two underlying mechanisms—a distorted perception of ability and a positivity bias in the skill condition. Notably, while distorted self-perception shaped behaviour, it did not affect confidence; instead, self-attribution bias led to overconfidence in external blame. These findings suggest a more complex picture in which self-attribution biases arise from both perceptual distortions and post-decision evaluations, highlighting the need for an interplay between experimental design and computational modelling to understand behavioural biases.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1013787

Cites

51 of 51 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

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

2 of the 53 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Okamoto, N., Taylor, M., Kubo, T., Ishii, S., De Martino, B., & Cortese, A.
Affiliations
  • Kyoto University (JP)
  • University College London (GB)
  • Advanced Telecommunications Research Institute International (JP)
Venue
PLOS Computational Biology
Published
2025-12-16
Volume
21
Issue
12
Pages
e1013787
ISSN
  • 1553-734X (ISSN-L)
  • 1553-7358
OpenAlex
W4417402417
Cited by
2
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1
FWCI
1.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS Computational Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Exploratory Research for Advanced Technology (JPMJER1801)
  • Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JP22H05156, JP22H04998, JP22H05163)
  • Innovative Science and Technology Initiative for Security (JPJ004596)
  • Japan Trust International Research Cooperation Program of the National Institute of Information and Communication
  • JST SPRING (JPMJSP2110)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
Keywords
self-attribution bias, luck versus skill, overconfidence, reward uncertainty, visuomotor task
MeSH terms
Adult, Computer Simulation, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Male, Psychomotor Performance, Reward, Self Concept, Computational Biology, Young Adult

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