The Cost of Regulating Effort: Reward and Difficulty Cues With Longer Prediction Horizons Have a Stronger Impact on Performance.

Many theories on cognitive effort start from the assumption that cognitive effort can be expended at will, and flexibly up- or down-regulated depending on expected task demand and rewards. However, while effort regulation has been investigated across a wide range of incentive conditions, few investigated the cost of effort regulation itself. Across four experiments, we studied the effects of reward expectancy and task difficulty on effort expenditure in a perceptual decision-making task (random-dot-motion) and a cognitive control task (colour-naming Stroop), and within each task comparted cues between short (cueing the next trial) and long (cueing the next six trials) prediction horizons.

Reward and Efficacy Modulate the Rate of Anticipatory Pupil Dilation.

Pupil size is a well-established marker of cognitive effort, with greater efforts leading to larger pupils. This is particularly true for pupil size during task performance, whereas findings on anticipatory effort triggered by a cue stimulus are less consistent. For example, a recent report by Frömer et al.

From pupil to performance: Exploring the role of tonic norepinephrine levels in response inhibition using pretrial pupil measures.

Response inhibition is key to flexible behavior. Importantly, performance in any task, including response inhibition tasks, fluctuates on a moment-to-moment basis. Using pupillometry, we investigated the relationship between these behavioral fluctuations in response inhibition and naturally occurring fluctuations of norepinephrine (NE) levels in the brain before a given trial has even started.

Compensating for the mobile menace with extra effort: A pupillometry investigation of the mere presence effect of smartphones.

Previous research suggests that the mere presence of a smartphone can detrimentally affect performance. However, other studies failed to observe such detrimental effects. A limitation of existing studies is that no indexes of (potentially compensating) effort were included.

Mind the instructions: Reward cues are liked first, wanted later.

Current theories propose that mental effort is invested only when the anticipated benefits, such as rewards, outweigh the associated costs, like task difficulty. Yet, it remains unclear whether this motivational and mitigating aspect of reward processing is reflected in the evaluation of reward/difficulty cues as such, and to what extent it depends on task experience. In a pre-registered experiment (N = 84), we used the affect misattribution procedure (AMP) to gauge affective evaluations of nonword cues predicting reward and task difficulty levels.