1
|
Desjardins S, Tang R, Yip S, Roy M, Otto AR. Context effects in cognitive effort evaluation. Psychon Bull Rev 2024:10.3758/s13423-024-02547-8. [PMID: 39102161 DOI: 10.3758/s13423-024-02547-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/07/2024] [Indexed: 08/06/2024]
Abstract
When given a choice, people will avoid cognitively effortful courses of action because the experience of effort is evaluated as aversive and costly. At the same time, a body of work spanning psychology, economics, and neuroscience suggests that goods, actions, and experiences are often evaluated in the context in which they are encountered, rather in absolute terms. To probe the extent to which the evaluation of cognitive effort is also context-dependent, we had participants learn associations between unique stimuli and subjective demand levels across low-demand and high-demand contexts. We probed demand preferences and subjective evaluation using a forced-choice paradigm as well by examining effort ratings, taken both on-line (during learning) and off-line (after choice). When choosing between two stimuli objectively identical in terms of demand, participants showed a clear preference for the stimulus learned in the low- versus high-demand context and rated this stimulus as more subjectively effortful than the low-demand context in on-line but not off-line ratings, suggesting an assimilation effect. Finally, we observed that the extent to which individual participants who exhibited stronger assimilation effects in off-line demand ratings were more likely to manifest an assimilation effect in demand preferences. Broadly, our findings suggest that effort evaluations occur in a context-dependent manner and are specifically assimilated to the broader context in which they occur.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Rui Tang
- Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | - Seffie Yip
- Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | - Mathieu Roy
- Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | - A Ross Otto
- Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Master SL, Curtis CE, Dayan P. Wagers for work: Decomposing the costs of cognitive effort. PLoS Comput Biol 2024; 20:e1012060. [PMID: 38683857 PMCID: PMC11081491 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012060] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/31/2023] [Revised: 05/09/2024] [Accepted: 04/10/2024] [Indexed: 05/02/2024] Open
Abstract
Some aspects of cognition are more taxing than others. Accordingly, many people will avoid cognitively demanding tasks in favor of simpler alternatives. Which components of these tasks are costly, and how much, remains unknown. Here, we use a novel task design in which subjects request wages for completing cognitive tasks and a computational modeling procedure that decomposes their wages into the costs driving them. Using working memory as a test case, our approach revealed that gating new information into memory and protecting against interference are costly. Critically, other factors, like memory load, appeared less costly. Other key factors which may drive effort costs, such as error avoidance, had minimal influence on wage requests. Our approach is sensitive to individual differences, and could be used in psychiatric populations to understand the true underlying nature of apparent cognitive deficits.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah L. Master
- Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, New York, United States of America
| | - Clayton E. Curtis
- Department of Psychology, New York University, New York, New York, United States of America
- Center for Neural Science, New York University, New York, New York, United States of America
| | - Peter Dayan
- Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Tübingen, Deutschland
- University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Deutschland
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Bustamante LA, Oshinowo T, Lee JR, Tong E, Burton AR, Shenhav A, Cohen JD, Daw ND. Effort Foraging Task reveals positive correlation between individual differences in the cost of cognitive and physical effort in humans. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2023; 120:e2221510120. [PMID: 38064507 PMCID: PMC10723129 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2221510120] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/14/2023] [Accepted: 10/26/2023] [Indexed: 12/17/2023] Open
Abstract
Effort-based decisions, in which people weigh potential future rewards against effort costs required to achieve those rewards involve both cognitive and physical effort, though the mechanistic relationship between them is not yet understood. Here, we use an individual differences approach to isolate and measure the computational processes underlying effort-based decisions and test the association between cognitive and physical domains. Patch foraging is an ecologically valid reward rate maximization problem with well-developed theoretical tools. We developed the Effort Foraging Task, which embedded cognitive or physical effort into patch foraging, to quantify the cost of both cognitive and physical effort indirectly, by their effects on foraging choices. Participants chose between harvesting a depleting patch, or traveling to a new patch that was costly in time and effort. Participants' exit thresholds (reflecting the reward they expected to receive by harvesting when they chose to travel to a new patch) were sensitive to cognitive and physical effort demands, allowing us to quantify the perceived effort cost in monetary terms. The indirect sequential choice style revealed effort-seeking behavior in a minority of participants (preferring high over low effort) that has apparently been missed by many previous approaches. Individual differences in cognitive and physical effort costs were positively correlated, suggesting that these are perceived and processed in common. We used canonical correlation analysis to probe the relationship of task measures to self-reported affect and motivation, and found correlations of cognitive effort with anxiety, cognitive function, behavioral activation, and self-efficacy, but no similar correlations with physical effort.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura A. Bustamante
- Princeton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ08544
- Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Washington University in Saint Louis, Saint Louis, MO63130
| | - Temitope Oshinowo
- Princeton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ08544
| | - Jeremy R. Lee
- Princeton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ08544
| | - Elizabeth Tong
- Princeton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ08544
| | - Allison R. Burton
- Princeton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ08544
| | - Amitai Shenhav
- Department of Cognitive, Linguistic, and Psychological Sciences, Brown University, Providence, RI02912
- Carney Institute for Brain Science, Brown University, Providence, RI02906
| | - Jonathan D. Cohen
- Princeton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ08544
| | - Nathaniel D. Daw
- Princeton Neuroscience Institute, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ08544
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Zerna J, Scheffel C, Kührt C, Strobel A. Need for Cognition is associated with a preference for higher task load in effort discounting. Sci Rep 2023; 13:19501. [PMID: 37945572 PMCID: PMC10636210 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-44349-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/06/2023] [Accepted: 10/06/2023] [Indexed: 11/12/2023] Open
Abstract
When individuals set goals, they consider the subjective value (SV) of the anticipated reward and the required effort, a trade-off that is of great interest to psychological research. One approach to quantify the SVs of levels of difficulty of a cognitive task is the Cognitive Effort Discounting Paradigm by Westbrook and colleagues (2013). However, it fails to acknowledge the highly individual nature of effort, as it assumes a unidirectional, inverse relationship between task load and SVs. Therefore, it cannot map differences in effort perception that arise from traits like Need for Cognition, since individuals who enjoy effortful cognitive activities likely do not prefer the easiest level. We replicated the analysis of Westbrook and colleagues with an adapted version, the Cognitive and Affective Discounting (CAD) Paradigm. It quantifies SVs without assuming that the easiest level is preferred, thereby enabling the assessment of SVs for tasks without objective order of task load. Results show that many of the 116 participants preferred a more or the most difficult level. Variance in SVs was best explained by a declining logistic contrast of the [Formula: see text]-back levels and by the accuracy of responses, while reaction time as a predictor was highly volatile depending on the preprocessing pipeline. Participants with higher Need for Cognition scores perceived higher [Formula: see text]-back levels as less effortful and found them less aversive. Effects of Need for Cognition on SVs in lower levels did not reach significance, as group differences only emerged in higher levels. The CAD Paradigm appears to be well suited for assessing and analysing task preferences independent of the supposed objective task difficulty.Protocol registrationThe stage 1 protocol for this Registered Report was accepted in principle on August 19, 2022. The protocol, as accepted by the journal, can be found at: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/CPXTH .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Josephine Zerna
- Chair for Differential and Personality Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Zellescher Weg 17, Dresden, 01069, Germany.
| | - Christoph Scheffel
- Chair for Differential and Personality Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Zellescher Weg 17, Dresden, 01069, Germany
| | - Corinna Kührt
- Chair for Differential and Personality Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Zellescher Weg 17, Dresden, 01069, Germany
| | - Alexander Strobel
- Chair for Differential and Personality Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Zellescher Weg 17, Dresden, 01069, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Kührt C, Graupner ST, Paulus PC, Strobel A. Cognitive effort investment: Does disposition become action? PLoS One 2023; 18:e0289428. [PMID: 37607171 PMCID: PMC10443884 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0289428] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2023] [Accepted: 07/19/2023] [Indexed: 08/24/2023] Open
Abstract
Contrary to the law of less work, individuals with high levels of need for cognition and self-control tend to choose harder tasks more often. While both traits can be integrated into a core construct of dispositional cognitive effort investment, its relation to actual cognitive effort investment remains unclear. As individuals with high levels of cognitive effort investment are characterized by a high intrinsic motivation towards effortful cognition, they would be less likely to increase their effort based on expected payoff, but rather based on increasing demand. In the present study, we measured actual effort investment on multiple dimensions, i.e., subjective load, reaction time, accuracy, early and late frontal midline theta power, N2 and P3 amplitude, and pupil dilation. In a sample of N = 148 participants, we examined the relationship of dispositional cognitive effort investment and effort indices during a flanker and an n-back task with varying demand and payoff. Exploratorily, we examined this relationship for the two subdimensions cognitive motivation and effortful-self-control as well. In both tasks, effort indices were sensitive to demand and partly to payoff. The analyses revealed a main effect of cognitive effort investment for accuracy (n-back task), interaction effects with payoff for reaction time (n-back and flanker task) and P3 amplitude (n-back task) and demand for early frontal midline theta power (flanker task). Taken together, our results partly support the notion that individuals with high levels of cognitive effort investment exert effort more efficiently. Moreover, the notion that these individuals exert effort regardless of payoff is partly supported, too. This may further our understanding of the conditions under which person-situation interactions occur, i.e. the conditions under which situations determine effort investment in goal-directed behavior more than personality, and vice versa.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Corinna Kührt
- Faculty of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| | | | | | - Alexander Strobel
- Faculty of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Mækelæ MJ, Klevjer K, Westbrook A, Eby NS, Eriksen R, Pfuhl G. Is it cognitive effort you measure? Comparing three task paradigms to the Need for Cognition scale. PLoS One 2023; 18:e0290177. [PMID: 37590223 PMCID: PMC10434945 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290177] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2023] [Accepted: 08/02/2023] [Indexed: 08/19/2023] Open
Abstract
Measuring individual differences in cognitive effort can be elusive as effort is a function of motivation and ability. We report six studies (N = 663) investigating the relationship of Need for Cognition and working memory capacity with three cognitive effort measures: demand avoidance in the Demand Selection Task, effort discounting measured as the indifference point in the Cognitive Effort Discounting paradigm, and rational reasoning score with items from the heuristic and bias literature. We measured perceived mental effort with the NASA task load index. The three tasks were not correlated with each other (all r's < .1, all p's > .1). Need for Cognition was positively associated with effort discounting (r = .168, p < .001) and rational reasoning (r = .176, p < .001), but not demand avoidance (r = .085, p = .186). Working memory capacity was related to effort discounting (r = .185, p = .004). Higher perceived effort was related to poorer rational reasoning. Our data indicate that two of the tasks are related to Need for Cognition but are also influenced by a participant's working memory capacity. We discuss whether any of the tasks measure cognitive effort.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Kristoffer Klevjer
- Department of Psychology, UiT–The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway
| | - Andrew Westbrook
- Department of Cognitive, Linguistic, and Psychological Sciences, Brown University, Providence, RI, United States of America
| | - Noah S. Eby
- Department of Neurology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States of America
| | - Rikke Eriksen
- Department of Psychology, UiT–The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway
| | - Gerit Pfuhl
- Department of Psychology, UiT–The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway
- Department of Psychology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Scheffel C, Zerna J, Gärtner A, Dörfel D, Strobel A. Estimating individual subjective values of emotion regulation strategies. Sci Rep 2023; 13:13262. [PMID: 37582918 PMCID: PMC10427653 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-40034-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/29/2022] [Accepted: 08/03/2023] [Indexed: 08/17/2023] Open
Abstract
Individuals have a repertoire of emotion regulation (ER) strategies at their disposal, which they can use more or less flexibly. In ER flexibility research, strategies that facilitate goal achievement are considered adaptive and therefore are subjectively valuable. Individuals are motivated to reduce their emotional arousal effectively and to avoid cognitive effort. Perceived costs of ER strategies in the form of effort, however, are highly subjective. Subjective values (SVs) should therefore represent a trade-off between effectiveness and subjectively required cognitive effort. However, SVs of ER strategies have not been determined so far. We present a new paradigm for quantifying individual SVs of ER strategies by offering monetary values for ER strategies in an iterative process. N = 120 participants first conducted an ER paradigm with the strategies distraction, distancing, and suppression. Afterwards, individual SVs were determined using the new CAD paradigm. SVs significantly predicted later choice for an ER strategy (χ2 (4, n = 119) = 115.40, p < 0.001, BF10 = 1.62 × 1021). Further, SVs were associated with Corrugator activity (t (5, 618.96) = 2.09, p = 0.037, f2 = 0.001), subjective effort (t (5, 618.96) = - 13.98, p < 0.001, f2 = 0.035), and self-reported utility (t (5, 618.96) = 29.49, p < 0.001, f2 = 0.155). SVs were further associated with self-control (t (97.97) = 2.04, p = 0.044, f2 = 0.002), but not with flexible ER. With our paradigm, we were able to determine subjective values. The trait character of the values will be discussed. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The stage 1 protocol for this Registered Report was accepted in principle on July 19, 2022. The protocol, as accepted by the journal, can be found at: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/FN9BT .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christoph Scheffel
- Chair of Differential and Personality Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, 01069, Dresden, Germany.
| | - Josephine Zerna
- Chair of Differential and Personality Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, 01069, Dresden, Germany
| | - Anne Gärtner
- Chair of Differential and Personality Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, 01069, Dresden, Germany
| | - Denise Dörfel
- Chair of Differential and Personality Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, 01069, Dresden, Germany
- Center for Information Services and High Performance Computing, Technische Universität Dresden, 01069, Dresden, Germany
| | - Alexander Strobel
- Chair of Differential and Personality Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, 01069, Dresden, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Egele VS, Klopp E, Stark R. Evaluating self-reported retrospective average daily fruit, vegetable, and egg intake: Trustworthy-Sometimes! Appl Psychol Health Well Being 2023; 15:1130-1149. [PMID: 36509422 DOI: 10.1111/aphw.12430] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2022] [Accepted: 11/28/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Retrospective self-reports are commonly used to assess dietary intake. Yet, their use is criticized as it is unclear whether the underlying assumptions for valid self-reports are met: Individuals have to consider the behavior of all days in the retention interval and weigh the behavior of all days equally. This study examines whether these assumptions for retrospective self-reports are met and whether interindividual differences in self-report performance are relevant regarding these assumptions. Ninety-two participants aged 18-61 years participated in seven sequential 24-h recalls and one retrospective 7-day recall concerning their intake of fruit, vegetables, and eggs. A multiple linear regression approach was used to examine the relation between the daily reported dietary intake and the 7-day recall. In the overall sample, the requirements for retrospective self-reports were not tenable. Distinguishing good and poor self-reporters based on a rational criterion showed that the requirements can be taken as given for good self-reporters, whereas poor self-reporters base their retrospective self-reports mostly on recency effects. The underlying requirements for retrospective self-reports appear to be met in two thirds of the sample, supporting the use of retrospective self-reports to capture dietary behavior. Future research should investigate characteristics separating good from poor self-reporters.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Viktoria S Egele
- Department of Educational Research, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany
| | - Eric Klopp
- Department of Educational Research, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany
| | - Robin Stark
- Department of Educational Research, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Aschenbrenner AJ, Crawford JL, Peelle JE, Fagan AM, Benzinger TLS, Morris JC, Hassenstab J, Braver TS. Increased cognitive effort costs in healthy aging and preclinical Alzheimer's disease. Psychol Aging 2023; 38:428-442. [PMID: 37067479 PMCID: PMC10440282 DOI: 10.1037/pag0000742] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/18/2023]
Abstract
Life-long engagement in cognitively demanding activities may mitigate against declines in cognitive ability observed in healthy or pathological aging. However, the "mental costs" associated with completing cognitive tasks also increase with age and may be partly attributed to increases in preclinical levels of Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology, specifically amyloid. We test whether cognitive effort costs increase in a domain-general manner among older adults, and further, whether such age-related increases in cognitive effort costs are associated with working memory (WM) capacity or amyloid burden, a signature pathology of AD. In two experiments, we administered a behavioral measure of cognitive effort costs (cognitive effort discounting) to a sample of older adults recruited from online sources (Experiment 1) or from ongoing longitudinal studies of aging and dementia (Experiment 2). Experiment 1 compared age-related differences in cognitive effort costs across two domains, WM and speech comprehension. Experiment 2 compared cognitive effort costs between a group of participants who were rated positive for amyloid relative to those with no evidence of amyloid. Results showed age-related increases in cognitive effort costs were evident in both domains. Cost estimates were highly correlated between the WM and speech comprehension tasks but did not correlate with WM capacity. In addition, older adults who were amyloid positive had higher cognitive effort costs than those who were amyloid negative. Cognitive effort costs may index a domain-general trait that consistently increases in aging. Differences in cognitive effort costs associated with amyloid burden suggest a potential neurobiological mechanism for age-related differences. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jennifer L Crawford
- Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis
| | | | - Anne M Fagan
- Department of Neurology, Washington University in St. Louis
| | | | - John C Morris
- Department of Neurology, Washington University in St. Louis
| | | | - Todd S Braver
- Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Grass J, Scherbaum S, Strobel A. A Question of Method and Subjective Beliefs. JOURNAL OF INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES 2022. [DOI: 10.1027/1614-0001/a000381] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
Abstract. Need for Cognition (NFC) describes the relatively stable intrinsic motivation to engage in cognitive endeavors. Recent research has revealed the importance of NFC for affective adjustment, especially in combination with self-control. We followed up on those findings by addressing methodological issues as well as processes that may underlie relations of NFC to self-control. Study 1 ( N = 102) examined whether NFC is associated with self-control independently of the measure or facet considered. Implicit willpower theories, that is, subjective beliefs concerning the limitation of self-control resources, were examined as a mediator for NFC predicting self-control. Higher NFC was associated with increased trait self-control but also with believing in unlimited self-control resources. The relation of NFC to willpower theories also mediated the prediction of trait self-control. Study 2 ( N = 188) replicated relations of NFC to self-control. We further pursued the explanatory approach from Study 1 and experimentally manipulated willpower theories to provide insight into their association with NFC. Willpower theories were related to NFC but had no mediating role in predicting self-control. The experimental manipulation had no impact on situation-specific NFC. Altogether, both studies provided first evidence that relations of NFC to self-control depend on the self-control measure and that willpower theories may be crucial for explaining the association with self-control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julia Grass
- Personality Psychology and Assessment, Behavioural and Social Sciences, Chemnitz University of Technology, Germany
| | - Stefan Scherbaum
- Methods of Psychology and Cognitive Modeling, Faculty of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany
| | - Anja Strobel
- Personality Psychology and Assessment, Behavioural and Social Sciences, Chemnitz University of Technology, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Crawford JL, Eisenstein SA, Peelle JE, Braver TS. Domain-general cognitive motivation: Evidence from economic decision-making - Final Registered Report. Cogn Res Princ Implic 2022; 7:23. [PMID: 35301624 PMCID: PMC8931160 DOI: 10.1186/s41235-022-00363-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/10/2020] [Accepted: 01/19/2022] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
Stable individual differences in cognitive motivation (i.e., the tendency to engage in and enjoy effortful cognitive activities) have been documented with self-report measures, yet convergent support for a trait-level construct is still lacking. In the present study, we used an innovative decision-making paradigm (COG-ED) to quantify the costs of cognitive effort, a metric of cognitive motivation, across two distinct cognitive domains: working memory (an N-back task) and speech comprehension (understanding spoken sentences in background noise). We hypothesized that cognitive motivation operates similarly within individuals, regardless of domain. Specifically, in 104 adults aged 18-40 years, we tested whether individual differences in effort costs are stable across domains, even after controlling for other potential sources of shared individual variation. Conversely, we evaluated whether the costs of cognitive effort across domains may be better explained in terms of other relevant cognitive and personality-related constructs, such as working memory capacity or reward sensitivity. We confirmed a reliable association among effort costs in both domains, even when these other sources of individual variation, as well as task load, are statistically controlled. Taken together, these results add support for trait-level variation in cognitive motivation impacting effort-based decision making across multiple domains.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer L. Crawford
- Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Dr, Box 1125, St. Louis, MO 63130 USA
| | - Sarah A. Eisenstein
- Department of Psychiatry, Washington University in St. Louis, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Box 8225, St. Louis, MO 63110 USA
- Department of Radiology, Washington University in St. Louis, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Box 8225, St. Louis, MO 63110 USA
| | - Jonathan E. Peelle
- Department of Otolaryngology, Washington University in St. Louis, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Box 8115, Saint Louis, MO 63110 USA
| | - Todd S. Braver
- Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Dr, Box 1125, St. Louis, MO 63130 USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Crawford JL, Eisenstein SA, Peelle JE, Braver TS. Domain-general cognitive motivation: evidence from economic decision-making. Cogn Res Princ Implic 2021; 6:4. [PMID: 33538943 PMCID: PMC7862467 DOI: 10.1186/s41235-021-00272-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/10/2020] [Accepted: 01/12/2021] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Stable individual differences in cognitive motivation (i.e., the tendency to engage in and enjoy effortful cognitive activities) have been documented with self-report measures, yet convergent support for a trait-level construct is still lacking. In the present study, we use an innovative decision-making paradigm (COG-ED) to quantify the costs of cognitive effort, a metric of cognitive motivation, across two distinct cognitive domains (working memory and speech comprehension). We hypothesize that cognitive motivation operates similarly within individuals, regardless of domain. Specifically, we test whether individual differences in effort costs are stable across domains, even after controlling for other potential sources of shared individual variation. Conversely, we evaluate whether the costs of cognitive effort across domains may be better explained in terms of other relevant cognitive and personality-related constructs, such as working memory capacity or reward sensitivity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer L. Crawford
- Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Dr, Box 1125, St. Louis, MO 63130 USA
| | - Sarah A. Eisenstein
- Department of Psychiatry, Washington University in St. Louis, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Box 8225, St. Louis, MO 63110 USA
- Department of Radiology, Washington University in St. Louis, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Box 8225, St. Louis, MO 63110 USA
| | - Jonathan E. Peelle
- Department of Otolaryngology, Washington University in St. Louis, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Box 8115, St. Louis, MO 63110 USA
| | - Todd S. Braver
- Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Dr, Box 1125, St. Louis, MO 63130 USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Kührt C, Pannasch S, Kiebel SJ, Strobel A. Dispositional individual differences in cognitive effort investment: establishing the core construct. BMC Psychol 2021; 9:10. [PMID: 33482925 PMCID: PMC7821547 DOI: 10.1186/s40359-021-00512-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/20/2019] [Accepted: 01/12/2021] [Indexed: 01/17/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Individuals tend to avoid effortful tasks, regardless of whether they are physical or mental in nature. Recent experimental evidence is suggestive of individual differences in the dispositional willingness to invest cognitive effort in goal-directed behavior. The traits need for cognition (NFC) and self-control are related to behavioral measures of cognitive effort discounting and demand avoidance, respectively. Given that these traits are only moderately related, the question arises whether they reflect a common core factor underlying cognitive effort investment. If so, the common core of both traits might be related to behavioral measures of effort discounting in a more systematic fashion. To address this question, we aimed at specifying a core construct of cognitive effort investment that reflects dispositional differences in the willingness and tendency to exert effortful control. METHODS We conducted two studies (N = 613 and N = 244) with questionnaires related to cognitive motivation and effort investment including assessment of NFC, intellect, self-control and effortful control. We first calculated Pearson correlations followed by two mediation models regarding intellect and its separate aspects, seek and conquer, as mediators. Next, we performed a confirmatory factor analysis of a hierarchical model of cognitive effort investment as second-order latent variable. First-order latent variables were cognitive motivation reflecting NFC and intellect, and effortful self-control reflecting self-control and effortful control. Finally, we calculated Pearson correlations between factor scores of the latent variables and general self-efficacy as well as traits of the Five Factor Model of Personality for validation purposes. RESULTS Our findings support the hypothesized correlations between the assessed traits, where the relationship of NFC and self-control is specifically mediated via goal-directedness. We established and replicated a hierarchical factor model of cognitive motivation and effortful self-control that explains the shared variance of the first-order factors by a second-order factor of cognitive effort investment. CONCLUSIONS Taken together, our results integrate disparate literatures on cognitive motivation and self-control and provide a basis for further experimental research on the role of dispositional individual differences in goal-directed behavior and cost-benefit-models.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Corinna Kührt
- Faculty of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Zellescher Weg 17, 01062, Dresden, Germany.
| | - Sebastian Pannasch
- Faculty of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Zellescher Weg 17, 01062, Dresden, Germany
| | - Stefan J Kiebel
- Faculty of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Zellescher Weg 17, 01062, Dresden, Germany
| | - Alexander Strobel
- Faculty of Psychology, Technische Universität Dresden, Zellescher Weg 17, 01062, Dresden, Germany
| |
Collapse
|