Hangry in the field: An experience sampling study on the impact of hunger on anger, irritability, and affect

The colloquial term “hangry” refers to the notion that people become angry when hungry, but very little research has directly determined the extent to which the relationship between hunger and negative emotions is robust. Here, we examined associations between everyday experiences of hunger and negative emotions using an experience sampling method. Sixty-four participants from Central Europe completed a 21-day experience sampling phase in which they reported their hunger, anger, irritability, pleasure, and arousal at five time-points each day (total = 9,142 responses). Results indicated that greater levels of self-reported hunger were associated with greater feelings of anger and irritability, and with lower pleasure. These findings remained significant after accounting for participant sex, age, body mass index, dietary behaviours, and trait anger. In contrast, associations with arousal were not significant. These results provide evidence that everyday levels of hunger are associated with negative emotionality and supports the notion of being “hangry”.

Does Ego Depletion Elicit Stronger Cues of Deception?

Lying is cognitively demanding and presumably requires self-regulation. According to ego depletion theory, a task that requires self-regulation should therefore impair an individual’s ability to tell a convincing lie in a later task. Consequently, it was hypothesized that a manipulation of ego depletion would enhance behavioral differences between liars and truth-tellers. To manipulate ego depletion, participants worked (vs. did not work) on a task in which they had to suppress dominant responses while copying a text. Subsequently, they talked in a simulated job interview about a job they had previously held (vs. not held). In the sample of 164 participants, there was no evidence to support the hypothesis; the expected Ego Depletion x Veracity interaction was not significant for any of the 15 behavioral cues coded in the videotaped interviews. Although the main effect of ego depletion was significant at the multivariate level for the first of two parts of the interview, none of the univariate main effects reached the significance level corrected for multiple testing. Bayesian analyses rendered moderate to strong evidence in favor of the null hypothesis. Possible implications of the results are discussed, also those related to ego depletion theory.

A within-subjects test of ego depletion and potential moderators

Ego depletion, the finding that initial exertion of self-control hinders performance on subsequent self-control tasks, has become a controversial topic. There have been discrepant results from empirical studies and different conclusions drawn from meta-analyses and multilab studies. We examined ego depletion and three potential moderators in a preregistered experiment using a within-subjects design in order to overcome limitations of the standard between-subjects design. In two sessions separated by 1 week, participants (N = 214) completed an ego depletion or control version of a Stroop task. Each Stroop task was followed by manipulation check questions and an antisaccade task. Participants also completed measures of lay theory of willpower, trait self-control, and action orientation. There was no significant evidence for ego depletion, and Bayes factors strongly favored the null hypotheses that there was no difference in antisaccade performance (accuracy or response time) after ego depletion and control Stroop tasks. Additionally, lay theory willpower, trait self-control, and action orientation were not significantly related to ego depletion effects. Exploratory between-subjects comparisons that omitted participants who responded at lower than chance accuracy levels, however, found significant ego depletion effects. These results provide further evidence that ego depletion effects are elusive.

Quantifying the cost of decision fatigue: suboptimal risk decisions in finance

Making decisions over extended periods of time is cognitively taxing and can lead to decision fatigue, which is linked to a preference for the 'default' option, namely whatever decision involves relatively little cognitive effort. Such effects have been demonstrated across a number of applied settings, including forensic and clinical contexts. Previous research, however, has not quantified the cost of such suboptimal decisions. We assessed the magnitude of the negative consequences of decision fatigue in the finance sector. Using 26 501 credit loan applications evaluated by credit officers of a major bank, we show that in this real-life financial risk-taking context credit loan approvals across the course of a day decreased during midday compared with early or later in the workday, reflecting a preference for the default option. To quantify the economic loss associated with such decision variability, we then modelled the bank's additional credit collection if all decisions had been made during early morning levels of approval. This would have resulted in $509 023 extra revenue for the bank, for one month. Thus, we provide further evidence that is consistent with a pattern of decision fatigue, and that it can have a substantial negative impact in the finance sector that warrants considerations to counteract it.