» Articles » PMID: 37616076

Policy Abstraction As a Predictor of Cognitive Effort Avoidance

Overview
Specialty Psychology
Date 2023 Aug 24
PMID 37616076
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Consistent evidence has established that people avoid cognitively effortful tasks. However, the features that make a task cognitively effortful are still not well understood. Multiple hypotheses have been proposed regarding which task demands underlie cognitive effort costs, such as time-on-task, error likelihood, and the general engagement of cognitive control. In this study, we test the novel hypothesis that tasks requiring behavior according to higher degrees of policy abstraction are experienced as more effortful. Accordingly, policy abstraction, operationalized as the levels of contextual contingency required by task rules, drives task avoidance over and above the effects of task performance, such as time-on-task or error likelihood. To test this hypothesis, we combined two previously established cognitive control tasks that parametrically manipulated policy abstraction with the demand selection task procedure. The design of these tasks allowed us to test whether people avoided tasks with higher order policy abstraction while controlling for the contribution of factors such as time-on-task and expected error rate (ER). Consistent with our hypothesis, we observed that policy abstraction was the strongest predictor of cognitive effort choices, followed by ER. This was evident across both studies and in a within-subject cross-study analysis. These results establish at least one task feature independent of performance, which is predictive of task avoidance behavior. We interpret these results within an opportunity cost framework for understanding aversive experiences of cognitive effort while performing a task. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Citing Articles

Wagers for work: Decomposing the costs of cognitive effort.

Master S, Curtis C, Dayan P PLoS Comput Biol. 2024; 20(4):e1012060.

PMID: 38683857 PMC: 11081491. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012060.


Distinct neural mechanisms for action access and execution in the human brain: insights from an fMRI study.

Papitto G, Friederici A, Zaccarella E Cereb Cortex. 2024; 34(4).

PMID: 38629799 PMC: 11022341. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhae163.


Binding of response-independent task rules.

Schiltenwolf M, Dignath D, Hazeltine E Psychon Bull Rev. 2024; 31(4):1821-1832.

PMID: 38302791 PMC: 11358165. DOI: 10.3758/s13423-024-02465-9.


Need for cognition moderates the relief of avoiding cognitive effort.

Gheza D, Kool W, Pourtois G PLoS One. 2023; 18(11):e0287954.

PMID: 37972115 PMC: 10653461. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0287954.

References
1.
Kurzban R, Duckworth A, Kable J, Myers J . An opportunity cost model of subjective effort and task performance. Behav Brain Sci. 2013; 36(6):661-79. PMC: 3856320. DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X12003196. View

2.
Kool W, McGuire J, Rosen Z, Botvinick M . Decision making and the avoidance of cognitive demand. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2010; 139(4):665-82. PMC: 2970648. DOI: 10.1037/a0020198. View

3.
Dunn T, Gaspar C, Risko E . Cue awareness in avoiding effortful control. Neuropsychologia. 2018; 123:77-91. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.05.011. View

4.
Schouppe N, Demanet J, Boehler C, Ridderinkhof K, Notebaert W . The role of the striatum in effort-based decision-making in the absence of reward. J Neurosci. 2014; 34(6):2148-54. PMC: 6608538. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1214-13.2014. View

5.
Westbrook A, Kester D, Braver T . What is the subjective cost of cognitive effort? Load, trait, and aging effects revealed by economic preference. PLoS One. 2013; 8(7):e68210. PMC: 3718823. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0068210. View