ArticleCommunications psychology2026
Cognitive flexibility versus stability via activation-based and weight-based adaptations.
Article in Communications psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Learning and Using Different Task Rule Updating Strategies Require Extensive Practice.Cognitive science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Humans are remarkably efficient at adapting to different contextual demands by exerting optimal levels of cognitive flexibility versus stability for switching between different tasks. However, empirical findings document that these control adaptation processes can occur across multiple timescales, suggesting that different computational mechanisms may be involved. Here, we developed a recurrent neural network model to simulate behavioral indices of cognitive flexibility versus stability and investigated its dynamics. Throughout four simulation studies, we revealed that control adaptations that benefit from recent control states (activation-based) can support fast adjustments in cognitive flexibility, whereas control adaptations that depend on changes in control settings (weight-based) evolve more slowly over learning. Interestingly, like humans, the model further learned to associate contextual features to different control settings and use this knowledge to shift along a flexibility-stability continuum when encountering these same contexts. We further verified model-specific predictions through an analysis of an existing human dataset (N = 102). In sum, our work integrates fast and slow control adaptations within a unified framework and advances our understanding on human adaptative behavior and its regulatory mechanisms through the lens of activation-based versus weight-based adaptations.
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.