↓ Skip to main content

Approaches to Cognitive Modeling in Dynamic Systems Control

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Approaches to Cognitive Modeling in Dynamic Systems Control
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, November 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02032
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel V. Holt, Magda Osman

Abstract

Much of human decision making occurs in dynamic situations where decision makers have to control a number of interrelated elements (dynamic systems control). Although in recent years progress has been made toward assessing individual differences in control performance, the cognitive processes underlying exploration and control of dynamic systems are not yet well understood. In this perspectives article we examine the contribution of different approaches to modeling cognition in dynamic systems control, including instance-based learning, heuristic models, complex knowledge-based models and models of causal learning. We conclude that each approach has particular strengths in modeling certain aspects of cognition in dynamic systems control. In particular, Bayesian models of causal learning and hybrid models combining heuristic strategies with reinforcement learning appear to be promising avenues for further work in this field.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 22%
Student > Master 6 13%
Researcher 6 13%
Professor 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 11 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 9 20%
Engineering 5 11%
Social Sciences 4 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 9%
Computer Science 3 7%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 11 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 November 2017.
All research outputs
#18,576,001
of 23,007,887 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,476
of 30,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#326,119
of 438,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#464
of 547 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,887 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,246 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 438,537 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 547 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.