A reference-based theory of motivation and effort allocation

Worth the Work? Monkeys Discount Rewards by a Subjective Adapting Effort Cost

All life must solve how to allocate limited energy resources to maximize benefits from scarce opportunities. Economic theory posits decision makers optimize choice by maximizing the subjective benefit (utility) of reward minus the subjective cost (disutility) of the required effort. While successful in many settings, this model does not fully account for how experience can alter reward-effort trade-offs. Here, we test how well the subtractive model of effort disutility explains the behavior of two male nonhuman primates (Macaca mulatta) in a binary choice task in which reward quantity and physical effort to obtain were varied. Applying random utility modeling to independently estimate reward utility and effort disutility, we show the subtractive effort model better explains out-of-sample choice behavior when compared with parabolic and exponential effort discounting. Furthermore, we demonstrate that effort disutility depends on previous experience of effort: in analogy to work from behavioral labor economics, we develop a model of reference-dependent effort disutility to explain the increased willingness to expend effort following previous experience of effortful options in a session. The result of this analysis suggests that monkeys discount reward by an effort cost that is measured relative to an expected effort learned from previous trials. When this subjective cost of effort, a function of context and experience, is accounted for, trial-by-trial choices can be explained by the subtractive cost model of effort. Therefore, in searching for net utility signals that may underpin effort-based decision-making in the brain, careful measurement of subjective effort costs is an essential first step.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT All decision-makers need to consider how much effort they need to expend when evaluating potential options. Economic theories suggest that the optimal way to choose is by cost-benefit analysis of reward against effort. To be able to do this efficiently over many decision contexts, this needs to be done flexibly, with appropriate adaptation to context and experience. Therefore, in aiming to understand how this might be achieved in the brain, it is important to first carefully measure the subjective cost of effort. Here, we show monkeys make reward-effort cost-benefit decisions, subtracting the subjective cost of effort from the subjective value of rewards. Moreover, the subjective cost of effort is dependent on the monkeys' experience of effort in previous trials.

Intrinsic Motivation: Knowledge, Achievement, and Experimentation in Sports Science Students-Relations with Emotional Intelligence

In this paper, we have focused on the Self-Determination Theory, paying special attention to intrinsic motivation, which is understood as the motivation that leads the subject to perform a task without the expectation of obtaining an external reward. In the field of sport, motivation is one of the most studied variables and one of the most researched, since it is closely related to the reasons that lead the athletes to start, maintain, and abandon sports practice. The main objective of this study is to analyze the relationship between intrinsic motivation (IM) and emotional intelligence from the theoretical contributions of the Self-Determination Theory. The specific objectives are to analyze attention, clarity, and emotional regulation, as well as intrinsic motivation to acquire knowledge. Additionally, we aim to explore the relationship between attention, clarity, and emotional regulation and the intrinsic motivation to achieve something. Lastly, we investigate the correspondence between attention, clarity, and emotional regulation and the intrinsic motivation to experience stimuli. The sample consists of 163 undergraduate and master's students related to Physical Activity and Sports Sciences, studying at a Spanish public university, located in the southeast region of Andalusia-specifically, in the city of Almería. The participants had a mean age of 20.33 years. In terms of gender, 70.9% (n = 117) were men and 27.9% (n = 46) women. In terms of degree, 76.7% (n = 147) were undergraduate students and 23.3% (n = 18) were postgraduate students. The Sports Motivation Scale (SMS/EMD) was used to assess intrinsic motivation, and the TMMS-24 was used to assess emotional intelligence. The main findings of this research demonstrate the existence of a relationship between the three dimensions of emotional intelligence (emotional attention, emotional clarity, and emotional regulation) and intrinsic motivation (intrinsic motivation to know something, intrinsic motivation to achieve something, and intrinsic motivation to experience stimulation). These findings emphasize the importance of emotional intelligence for intrinsic motivation.

Worth the work? Monkeys discount rewards by a subjective adapting effort cost

All life must solve how to allocate limited energy resources to maximise benefits from scarce opportunities. Economic theory posits decision makers optimise choice by maximising the subjective benefit (utility) of reward minus the subjective cost (disutility) of the required effort. While successful in many settings, this model does not fully account for how experience can alter reward-effort trade-offs. Here we test how well the subtractive model of effort disutility explains the behavior of two non-human primates ( Macaca mulatta ) in a binary choice task in which reward quantity and physical effort to obtain were varied.Applying random utility modelling to independently estimate reward utility and effort disutility, we show the subtractive effort model better explains out-of-sample choice behavior when compared to parabolic and exponential effort discounting. Furthermore, we demonstrate that effort disutility is dependent on previous experience of effort: in analogy to work from behavioral labour economics, we develop a model of reference-dependent effort disutility to explain the increased willingness to expend effort following previous experience of effortful options in a session. The result of this analysis suggests that monkeys discount reward by an effort cost that is measured relative to an expected effort learned from previous trials. When this subjective cost of effort, a function of context and experience, is accounted for, trial-by-trial choice behavior can be explained by the subtractive cost model of effort.Therefore, in searching for net utility signals that may underpin effort-based decision-making in the brain, careful measurement of subjective effort costs is an essential first step.

Significance

All decision-makers need to consider how much effort they need to expend when evaluating potential options. Economic theories suggest that the optimal way to choose is by cost-benefit analysis of reward against effort. To be able to do this efficiently over many decision contexts, this needs to be done flexibly, with appropriate adaptation to context and experience. Therefore, in aiming to understand how this might be achieved in the brain, it is important to first carefully measure the subjective cost of effort. Here we show monkeys make reward-effort cost-benefit decisions, subtracting the subjective cost of effort from the subjective value of rewards. Moreover, the subjective cost of effort is dependent on the monkeys’ experience of effort in previous trials.

A computational theory of evaluation processes in apathy

Computational modelling can offer valuable insight on mental illness. However, this approach has rarely been adopted to investigate apathy, a condition characterising a variety of psychiatric and neurological syndromes. This paper proposes a computational model of apathy and tests key model predictions in the healthy adult population. Building upon recent reference-dependent theories of evaluation, the model interprets apathy as arising from an excessive uncertainty about the distribution of incentives in the environment. This predicts that high-apathy individuals appraise the value of stimuli as less extreme and as more similar to one another. These predictions were assessed in two online studies where healthy adults rated the value of pictures characterised by varying levels of emotional salience. In line with the model, we observed that high-apathy individuals perceive negative stimuli as less negative, positive stimuli as less positive, and discriminate less among stimuli characterised by different salience. The contribution of this paper is twofold. On a more specific level, it sheds light on the precise mechanisms underlying evaluation processes in apathy. On a more general level, it highlights the insight offered by models of reference-dependent evaluation for understanding psychopathology.