Back

Motivational context determines the impact of aversive outcomes on mental effort allocation

Prater Fahey, M.; Yee, D. M.; Leng, X.; Tarlow, M.; Shenhav, A.

2023-12-07 neuroscience
10.1101/2023.10.27.564461 bioRxiv
Show abstract

It is well known that people will exert effort on a task if sufficiently motivated, but how they distribute these efforts across different strategies (e.g., efficiency vs. caution) remains uncertain. Past work has shown that people invest effort differently for potential positive outcomes (rewards) versus potential negative outcomes (penalties). However, this research failed to account for differences in the context in which negative outcomes motivate someone - either as punishment or reinforcement. It is therefore unclear whether effort profiles differ as a function of outcome valence, motivational context, or both. Using computational modeling and our novel Multi-Incentive Control Task, we show that the influence of aversive outcomes on ones effort profile is entirely determined by their motivational context. Participants (N:91) favored increased caution in response to larger penalties for incorrect responses, and favored increased efficiency in response to larger reinforcement for correct responses, whether positively or negatively incentivized. Statement of RelevancePeople have to constantly decide how to allocate their mental effort, and in doing so can be motivated by both the positive outcomes that effort accrues and the negative outcomes that effort avoids. For example, someone might persist on a project for work in the hopes of being promoted or to avoid being reprimanded or even fired. Understanding how people weigh these different types of incentives is critical for understanding variability in human achievement as well as sources of motivational impairments (e.g., in major depression). We show that people not only consider both potential positive and negative outcomes when allocating mental effort, but that the profile of effort they engage under negative incentives differs depending on whether that outcome is contingent on sustaining good performance (negative reinforcement) or avoiding bad performance (punishment). Clarifying the motivational factors that determine effort exertion is an important step for understanding motivational impairments in psychopathology.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 7%
9.9%
2
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.1%
3
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 12%
6.7%
4
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 6%
6.3%
5
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 12%
6.2%
6
The Journal of Neuroscience
928 papers in training set
Top 3%
4.8%
7
Nature Human Behaviour
85 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.9%
8
eneuro
389 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.9%
9
Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging
62 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.5%
50% of probability mass above
10
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
119 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.0%
11
Psychological Medicine
74 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.6%
12
Computational Psychiatry
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.4%
13
Cognition
44 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.3%
14
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.0%
15
Biological Psychiatry
119 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.0%
16
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 49%
1.9%
17
Psychological Review
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
18
Communications Psychology
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.5%
19
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
53 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.5%
20
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
46 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.5%
21
Psychological Science
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.3%
22
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 59%
1.3%
23
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 22%
1.2%
24
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
25
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
26
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.9%
27
npj Science of Learning
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.8%
28
Biological Psychiatry Global Open Science
54 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
29
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 20%
0.7%
30
European Journal of Neuroscience
168 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%