ArticleFrontiers in cognition2026
From probability to plausibility in climate-risk scenarios: a cognitive framework for decision-making under deep uncertainty.
Article in Frontiers in cognition, 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
Climate-risk scenario analysis has become central to financial supervision, adaptation planning, and institutional governance, yet formally modeled futures often fail to guide action. We argue that the gap between representation and response is partly cognitive. Drawing on constructive memory, mental time travel, source monitoring, episodic future thinking, scenario planning, and organizational sensemaking, we develop a framework of plausible futures for decision-making under deep uncertainty. On this account, climate futures gain practical force when they become mentally constructible, narratively scaffolded, socially stabilized, and culturally legitimated. Simulational fluency is proposed as one pathway through which scenario form may influence how readily decision-makers construct, inspect, compare, and rehearse possible futures. The framework identifies false precision in quantitative models and the ways narrative can sharpen or mislead judgement. These insights support the joint development of qualitative and quantitative approaches. Climate-risk governance requires sophisticated calculation together with anticipatory practices that allow institutions to inhabit uncertain futures cognitively; those practices keep uncertainty explicit and judgement both revisable and answerable to evidence.
Indexed as
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.