注意指示:奖励提示先喜欢后想要

IF 2.8 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Cognition Pub Date : 2024-07-17 DOI:10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105885
Nicoleta Prutean , Luc Vermeylen , Nanne Kukkonen , S. Tabitha Steendam , Joshua O. Eayrs , Ruth M. Krebs , Jan R. Wiersema , Eliana Vassena , C. Nico Boehler , Wim Notebaert
{"title":"注意指示:奖励提示先喜欢后想要","authors":"Nicoleta Prutean ,&nbsp;Luc Vermeylen ,&nbsp;Nanne Kukkonen ,&nbsp;S. Tabitha Steendam ,&nbsp;Joshua O. Eayrs ,&nbsp;Ruth M. Krebs ,&nbsp;Jan R. Wiersema ,&nbsp;Eliana Vassena ,&nbsp;C. Nico Boehler ,&nbsp;Wim Notebaert","doi":"10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105885","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Current theories propose that mental effort is invested only when the anticipated benefits, such as rewards, outweigh the associated costs, like task difficulty. Yet, it remains unclear whether this motivational and mitigating aspect of reward processing is reflected in the evaluation of reward/difficulty cues as such, and to what extent it depends on task experience. In a pre-registered experiment (<em>N</em> = 84), we used the affect misattribution procedure (AMP) to gauge affective evaluations of nonword cues predicting reward and task difficulty levels. Contrary to previous studies, the AMP was administered at the outset, after cue instructions, and after the cues were used in a random dot motion (RDM) task. Compared to baseline, cues predicting a larger reward were evaluated more positively after RDM task experience, and most importantly, already after cue instructions, with no difference between the two phases. This evaluative effect manifested in increased performance after larger reward cues in the RDM task. Our results suggest that AMP effects may generally capture performance expectations which are independent of task experience. Importantly, these instructed expectations of reward and difficulty play a crucial role in the evaluation and subsequent investment of mental effort.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48455,"journal":{"name":"Cognition","volume":"251 ","pages":"Article 105885"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mind the instructions: Reward cues are liked first, wanted later\",\"authors\":\"Nicoleta Prutean ,&nbsp;Luc Vermeylen ,&nbsp;Nanne Kukkonen ,&nbsp;S. Tabitha Steendam ,&nbsp;Joshua O. Eayrs ,&nbsp;Ruth M. Krebs ,&nbsp;Jan R. Wiersema ,&nbsp;Eliana Vassena ,&nbsp;C. Nico Boehler ,&nbsp;Wim Notebaert\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105885\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Current theories propose that mental effort is invested only when the anticipated benefits, such as rewards, outweigh the associated costs, like task difficulty. Yet, it remains unclear whether this motivational and mitigating aspect of reward processing is reflected in the evaluation of reward/difficulty cues as such, and to what extent it depends on task experience. In a pre-registered experiment (<em>N</em> = 84), we used the affect misattribution procedure (AMP) to gauge affective evaluations of nonword cues predicting reward and task difficulty levels. Contrary to previous studies, the AMP was administered at the outset, after cue instructions, and after the cues were used in a random dot motion (RDM) task. Compared to baseline, cues predicting a larger reward were evaluated more positively after RDM task experience, and most importantly, already after cue instructions, with no difference between the two phases. This evaluative effect manifested in increased performance after larger reward cues in the RDM task. Our results suggest that AMP effects may generally capture performance expectations which are independent of task experience. Importantly, these instructed expectations of reward and difficulty play a crucial role in the evaluation and subsequent investment of mental effort.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48455,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognition\",\"volume\":\"251 \",\"pages\":\"Article 105885\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010027724001719\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010027724001719","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目前的理论认为,只有当预期收益(如奖励)大于相关成本(如任务难度)时,才会投入脑力。然而,奖励加工中的这种动机和缓解方面是否反映在对奖励/难度线索的评估中,以及在多大程度上取决于任务经验,目前仍不清楚。在一项预先注册的实验中(N = 84),我们使用了情感错误归因程序(AMP)来衡量对预测奖励和任务难度水平的非词线索的情感评价。与以往研究不同的是,AMP 在开始时、提示说明后以及在随机点运动(RDM)任务中使用提示后进行。与基线相比,在经历了 RDM 任务后,预测会有更大奖励的线索会得到更积极的评价,最重要的是,在线索指示之后就会得到更积极的评价,两个阶段之间没有差异。这种评价效应表现为在 RDM 任务中获得较大奖励线索后成绩的提高。我们的研究结果表明,AMP效应通常可以捕捉到与任务经验无关的成绩预期。重要的是,这些对奖励和难度的指示性预期在评估和随后的脑力投入中起着至关重要的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Mind the instructions: Reward cues are liked first, wanted later

Current theories propose that mental effort is invested only when the anticipated benefits, such as rewards, outweigh the associated costs, like task difficulty. Yet, it remains unclear whether this motivational and mitigating aspect of reward processing is reflected in the evaluation of reward/difficulty cues as such, and to what extent it depends on task experience. In a pre-registered experiment (N = 84), we used the affect misattribution procedure (AMP) to gauge affective evaluations of nonword cues predicting reward and task difficulty levels. Contrary to previous studies, the AMP was administered at the outset, after cue instructions, and after the cues were used in a random dot motion (RDM) task. Compared to baseline, cues predicting a larger reward were evaluated more positively after RDM task experience, and most importantly, already after cue instructions, with no difference between the two phases. This evaluative effect manifested in increased performance after larger reward cues in the RDM task. Our results suggest that AMP effects may generally capture performance expectations which are independent of task experience. Importantly, these instructed expectations of reward and difficulty play a crucial role in the evaluation and subsequent investment of mental effort.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cognition
Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
283
期刊介绍: Cognition is an international journal that publishes theoretical and experimental papers on the study of the mind. It covers a wide variety of subjects concerning all the different aspects of cognition, ranging from biological and experimental studies to formal analysis. Contributions from the fields of psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, computer science, mathematics, ethology and philosophy are welcome in this journal provided that they have some bearing on the functioning of the mind. In addition, the journal serves as a forum for discussion of social and political aspects of cognitive science.
期刊最新文献
The role of exceptions in children's and adults' judgments about generic statements. Partisan language in a polarized world: In-group language provides reputational benefits to speakers while polarizing audiences. What's left of the leftward bias in scene viewing? Lateral asymmetries in information processing during early search guidance. Language enables the acquisition of distinct sensorimotor memories for speech. Morality on the road: Should machine drivers be more utilitarian than human drivers?
×
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