Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42661648›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cognition2026

From probability to plausibility in climate-risk scenarios: a cognitive framework for decision-making under deep uncertainty.

Jeffery R L Pendleton, Paul W Pritchard, David Wilkinson, Clive Wilkins, Nicola S Clayton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jeffery R L PendletonDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Paul W PritchardCambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
David WilkinsonUK Centre for Greening Finance and Investment, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Clive WilkinsDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Nicola S ClaytonDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

climate-risk scenariosconstructive memoryepisodic memoryinstitutional decision-makingmental time travelradical uncertaintyscenario planningsimulational fluency

Identifiers

PMID42661648
PMCPMC13518178

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.