研究努力-奖励相互作用对多发性硬化症患者认知疲劳的影响

IF 2 4区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY Journal of Neuropsychology Pub Date : 2022-10-08 DOI:10.1111/jnp.12295
Fareshte Erani, Darshan Patel, Benjamin L. Deck, Roy H. Hamilton, Maria T. Schultheis, John D. Medaglia
{"title":"研究努力-奖励相互作用对多发性硬化症患者认知疲劳的影响","authors":"Fareshte Erani,&nbsp;Darshan Patel,&nbsp;Benjamin L. Deck,&nbsp;Roy H. Hamilton,&nbsp;Maria T. Schultheis,&nbsp;John D. Medaglia","doi":"10.1111/jnp.12295","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study examined whether an alteration in the effort–reward relationship, a theoretical framework based on cognitive neuroscience, could explain cognitive fatigue. Forty persons with MS and 40 healthy age- and education-matched cognitively healthy controls (HC) participated in a computerized switching task with orthogonal high- and low-demand (effort) and reward manipulations. We used the Visual Analog Scale of Fatigue (VAS-F) to assess subjective state fatigue before and after each condition during the task. We used mixed-effects models to estimate the association and interaction between effort and reward and their relationship to subjective fatigue and task performance. We found the high-demand condition was associated with increased VAS-F scores (<i>p</i> &lt; .001), longer response times (RT) (<i>p</i> &lt; .001) and lower accuracy (<i>p</i> &lt; .001). The high-reward condition was associated with faster RT (<i>p</i> = .006) and higher accuracy (<i>p</i> = .03). There was no interaction effect between effort and reward on VAS-F scores or performance. Participants with MS reported higher VAS-F scores (<i>p</i> = .02). Across all conditions, participants with MS were slower (<i>p &lt;</i> .001) and slower as a function of condition demand compared with HC (<i>p</i> &lt; .001). This behavioural study did not find evidence that an effort–reward interaction is associated with cognitive fatigue. However, our findings support the role of effort in subjective cognitive fatigue and <i>both</i> effort and reward on task performance. In future studies, more salient reward manipulations could be necessary to identify effort–reward interactions on subjective cognitive fatigue.</p>","PeriodicalId":197,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Neuropsychology","volume":"17 2","pages":"364-381"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jnp.12295","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Investigating the influence of an effort–reward interaction on cognitive fatigue in individuals with multiple sclerosis\",\"authors\":\"Fareshte Erani,&nbsp;Darshan Patel,&nbsp;Benjamin L. Deck,&nbsp;Roy H. Hamilton,&nbsp;Maria T. Schultheis,&nbsp;John D. Medaglia\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jnp.12295\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This study examined whether an alteration in the effort–reward relationship, a theoretical framework based on cognitive neuroscience, could explain cognitive fatigue. Forty persons with MS and 40 healthy age- and education-matched cognitively healthy controls (HC) participated in a computerized switching task with orthogonal high- and low-demand (effort) and reward manipulations. We used the Visual Analog Scale of Fatigue (VAS-F) to assess subjective state fatigue before and after each condition during the task. We used mixed-effects models to estimate the association and interaction between effort and reward and their relationship to subjective fatigue and task performance. We found the high-demand condition was associated with increased VAS-F scores (<i>p</i> &lt; .001), longer response times (RT) (<i>p</i> &lt; .001) and lower accuracy (<i>p</i> &lt; .001). The high-reward condition was associated with faster RT (<i>p</i> = .006) and higher accuracy (<i>p</i> = .03). There was no interaction effect between effort and reward on VAS-F scores or performance. Participants with MS reported higher VAS-F scores (<i>p</i> = .02). Across all conditions, participants with MS were slower (<i>p &lt;</i> .001) and slower as a function of condition demand compared with HC (<i>p</i> &lt; .001). This behavioural study did not find evidence that an effort–reward interaction is associated with cognitive fatigue. However, our findings support the role of effort in subjective cognitive fatigue and <i>both</i> effort and reward on task performance. In future studies, more salient reward manipulations could be necessary to identify effort–reward interactions on subjective cognitive fatigue.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":197,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Neuropsychology\",\"volume\":\"17 2\",\"pages\":\"364-381\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jnp.12295\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Neuropsychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jnp.12295\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Neuropsychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jnp.12295","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这项研究考察了基于认知神经科学的理论框架——努力-回报关系的改变是否可以解释认知疲劳。40名多发性硬化症患者和40名健康年龄和教育程度相匹配的认知健康对照(HC)参加了一项具有正交高、低需求(努力)和奖励操作的计算机化转换任务。我们使用视觉模拟疲劳量表(VAS-F)来评估任务中每个条件前后的主观状态疲劳。我们使用混合效应模型来估计努力和奖励之间的关联和交互作用,以及它们与主观疲劳和任务绩效的关系。我们发现高要求条件与VAS-F分数增加(p < .001)、反应时间(RT)延长(p < .001)和准确性降低(p < .001)有关。高奖励条件与更快的RT (p = 0.006)和更高的准确率(p = 0.03)相关。努力和奖励对VAS-F分数和表现没有交互作用。MS患者的VAS-F评分较高(p = .02)。在所有情况下,多发性硬化症患者的反应都较慢(p <.001),与HC相比,条件需求的函数较慢(p < .001)。这项行为研究没有发现努力-奖励互动与认知疲劳有关的证据。然而,我们的研究结果支持努力在主观认知疲劳中的作用,以及努力和奖励对任务绩效的影响。在未来的研究中,可能需要更多显著的奖励操作来确定主观认知疲劳的努力-奖励相互作用。
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
Investigating the influence of an effort–reward interaction on cognitive fatigue in individuals with multiple sclerosis

This study examined whether an alteration in the effort–reward relationship, a theoretical framework based on cognitive neuroscience, could explain cognitive fatigue. Forty persons with MS and 40 healthy age- and education-matched cognitively healthy controls (HC) participated in a computerized switching task with orthogonal high- and low-demand (effort) and reward manipulations. We used the Visual Analog Scale of Fatigue (VAS-F) to assess subjective state fatigue before and after each condition during the task. We used mixed-effects models to estimate the association and interaction between effort and reward and their relationship to subjective fatigue and task performance. We found the high-demand condition was associated with increased VAS-F scores (p < .001), longer response times (RT) (p < .001) and lower accuracy (p < .001). The high-reward condition was associated with faster RT (p = .006) and higher accuracy (p = .03). There was no interaction effect between effort and reward on VAS-F scores or performance. Participants with MS reported higher VAS-F scores (p = .02). Across all conditions, participants with MS were slower (p < .001) and slower as a function of condition demand compared with HC (p < .001). This behavioural study did not find evidence that an effort–reward interaction is associated with cognitive fatigue. However, our findings support the role of effort in subjective cognitive fatigue and both effort and reward on task performance. In future studies, more salient reward manipulations could be necessary to identify effort–reward interactions on subjective cognitive fatigue.

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
Journal of Neuropsychology
Journal of Neuropsychology 医学-心理学
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
4.50%
发文量
34
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Neuropsychology publishes original contributions to scientific knowledge in neuropsychology including: • clinical and research studies with neurological, psychiatric and psychological patient populations in all age groups • behavioural or pharmacological treatment regimes • cognitive experimentation and neuroimaging • multidisciplinary approach embracing areas such as developmental psychology, neurology, psychiatry, physiology, endocrinology, pharmacology and imaging science The following types of paper are invited: • papers reporting original empirical investigations • theoretical papers; provided that these are sufficiently related to empirical data • review articles, which need not be exhaustive, but which should give an interpretation of the state of research in a given field and, where appropriate, identify its clinical implications • brief reports and comments • case reports • fast-track papers (included in the issue following acceptation) reaction and rebuttals (short reactions to publications in JNP followed by an invited rebuttal of the original authors) • special issues.
期刊最新文献
Non-optimal cognitive offloading in schizophrenia in a prospective memory task: Influence of both metacognitive beliefs and cognitive effort avoidance. Alzheimer's disease-Biomarkers, clinical evaluation or both? Resolving the problem of surface dyslexia in Italian through inflection of irregular verbs. Reducing confusion surrounding expert conceptions of Alzheimer's and dementia: A practical analysis. Translation and validation of the abbreviated Prefrontal Symptoms Inventory (PSI-20): A tool for assessing prefrontal symptoms in English-speaking populations.
×
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