Cargando…

Need for Cognition is associated with a preference for higher task load in effort discounting

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 Par...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zerna, Josephine, Scheffel, Christoph, Kührt, Corinna, Strobel, Alexander
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10636210/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37945572
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-44349-3
_version_ 1785133165571997696
author Zerna, Josephine
Scheffel, Christoph
Kührt, Corinna
Strobel, Alexander
author_facet Zerna, Josephine
Scheffel, Christoph
Kührt, Corinna
Strobel, Alexander
author_sort Zerna, Josephine
collection PubMed
description 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: 10.17605/OSF.IO/CPXTH.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10636210
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106362102023-11-11 Need for Cognition is associated with a preference for higher task load in effort discounting Zerna, Josephine Scheffel, Christoph Kührt, Corinna Strobel, Alexander Sci Rep Registered Report 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: 10.17605/OSF.IO/CPXTH. Nature Publishing Group UK 2023-11-09 /pmc/articles/PMC10636210/ /pubmed/37945572 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-44349-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Registered Report
Zerna, Josephine
Scheffel, Christoph
Kührt, Corinna
Strobel, Alexander
Need for Cognition is associated with a preference for higher task load in effort discounting
title Need for Cognition is associated with a preference for higher task load in effort discounting
title_full Need for Cognition is associated with a preference for higher task load in effort discounting
title_fullStr Need for Cognition is associated with a preference for higher task load in effort discounting
title_full_unstemmed Need for Cognition is associated with a preference for higher task load in effort discounting
title_short Need for Cognition is associated with a preference for higher task load in effort discounting
title_sort need for cognition is associated with a preference for higher task load in effort discounting
topic Registered Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10636210/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37945572
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-44349-3
work_keys_str_mv AT zernajosephine needforcognitionisassociatedwithapreferenceforhighertaskloadineffortdiscounting
AT scheffelchristoph needforcognitionisassociatedwithapreferenceforhighertaskloadineffortdiscounting
AT kuhrtcorinna needforcognitionisassociatedwithapreferenceforhighertaskloadineffortdiscounting
AT strobelalexander needforcognitionisassociatedwithapreferenceforhighertaskloadineffortdiscounting