The Cost of Regulating Effort: Reward and Difficulty Cues With Longer Prediction Horizons Have a Stronger Impact on Performance.

Q1 Psychology Journal of Cognition Pub Date : 2025-01-07 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.5334/joc.415
Nanne Kukkonen, Senne Braem, Jens Allaert, Joshua O Eayrs, Nicoleta Prutean, S Tabitha Steendam, C Nico Boehler, Jan R Wiersema, Wim Notebaert, Ruth M Krebs
{"title":"The Cost of Regulating Effort: Reward and Difficulty Cues With Longer Prediction Horizons Have a Stronger Impact on Performance.","authors":"Nanne Kukkonen, Senne Braem, Jens Allaert, Joshua O Eayrs, Nicoleta Prutean, S Tabitha Steendam, C Nico Boehler, Jan R Wiersema, Wim Notebaert, Ruth M Krebs","doi":"10.5334/joc.415","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Many theories on cognitive effort start from the assumption that cognitive effort can be expended at will, and flexibly up- or down-regulated depending on expected task demand and rewards. However, while effort regulation has been investigated across a wide range of incentive conditions, few investigated the cost of effort regulation itself. Across four experiments, we studied the effects of reward expectancy and task difficulty on effort expenditure in a perceptual decision-making task (random-dot-motion) and a cognitive control task (colour-naming Stroop), and within each task comparted cues between short (cueing the next trial) and long (cueing the next six trials) prediction horizons. We found that participants used the cue information only when it was valid for multiple trials in a row. In the random-dot-motion task, a high reward expectancy resulted in better accuracy, especially in easy trials, but only with long prediction horizon. Similarly, in the Stroop task, the reward facilitation of reaction time was only observed after reward cues with a long prediction horizon. Together, our results indicate that people experience a cost to effort regulation, and that lower adjustment frequency can compensate for this cost.</p>","PeriodicalId":32728,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cognition","volume":"8 1","pages":"9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11720864/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.415","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Many theories on cognitive effort start from the assumption that cognitive effort can be expended at will, and flexibly up- or down-regulated depending on expected task demand and rewards. However, while effort regulation has been investigated across a wide range of incentive conditions, few investigated the cost of effort regulation itself. Across four experiments, we studied the effects of reward expectancy and task difficulty on effort expenditure in a perceptual decision-making task (random-dot-motion) and a cognitive control task (colour-naming Stroop), and within each task comparted cues between short (cueing the next trial) and long (cueing the next six trials) prediction horizons. We found that participants used the cue information only when it was valid for multiple trials in a row. In the random-dot-motion task, a high reward expectancy resulted in better accuracy, especially in easy trials, but only with long prediction horizon. Similarly, in the Stroop task, the reward facilitation of reaction time was only observed after reward cues with a long prediction horizon. Together, our results indicate that people experience a cost to effort regulation, and that lower adjustment frequency can compensate for this cost.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
调节努力的成本:具有较长预测视野的奖励和难度线索对表现的影响更大。
许多关于认知努力的理论都假设认知努力是可以随意花费的,并且可以根据预期的任务需求和奖励灵活地上下调节。然而,尽管努力调节已经在广泛的激励条件下进行了研究,但很少有人研究努力调节本身的成本。在四个实验中,我们研究了奖励预期和任务难度对感知决策任务(随机点运动)和认知控制任务(颜色命名Stroop)的努力支出的影响,并在每个任务中比较了短期(提示下一个试验)和长期(提示下六个试验)预测范围的线索。我们发现,只有当线索信息在连续多次试验中有效时,参与者才会使用线索信息。在随机点运动任务中,高的奖励预期导致更高的准确率,特别是在简单的试验中,但只有在较长的预测范围内。同样,在Stroop任务中,只有在具有较长预测视界的奖励线索之后,才能观察到反应时间的奖励促进作用。总之,我们的结果表明,人们经历了努力调节的成本,而较低的调节频率可以补偿这种成本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Cognition
Journal of Cognition Psychology-Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
43
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Long-term Contingency Learning Depends on Contingency Awareness. I am Once Again Asking for Your Attention: A Replication of Feature-Based Attention Modulations of Binding Effects with Picture Stimuli. Implicit Learning of Parity and Magnitude Associations with Number Color. Exploring Inhibitory Control Processes in Highly Superior Autobiographical Memory (HSAM): A Single Case Study. Readiness for Perception and Action: Towards a More Mechanistic Understanding of Phasic Alertness.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1