The cognitive cost of going the extra mile: How striving for improvement relates to cognitive performance.

IF 9.4 1区 心理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT
Journal of Applied Psychology Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-23 DOI:10.1037/apl0001199
Mouna El Mansouri, Karoline Strauss, Doris Fay, Julia Smith
{"title":"The cognitive cost of going the extra mile: How striving for improvement relates to cognitive performance.","authors":"Mouna El Mansouri, Karoline Strauss, Doris Fay, Julia Smith","doi":"10.1037/apl0001199","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Organizations are increasingly expecting individuals to engage in task proactivity, that is, to find better ways of doing their job. While prior research has demonstrated the benefits of task proactivity, little is known about its cognitive costs. To investigate this issue, we build theory on how task proactivity affects end-of-day cognitive performance. We propose that task proactivity involves deviating from established ways of working and engaging in cognitively demanding activities requiring high levels of mental effort, which manifest as an erosion of end-of-day cognitive performance. In two daily diary studies, we found that individuals engaging in task proactivity experience lower end-of-day cognitive performance (Study 1 over five consecutive workdays: <i>n</i> = 163, <i>k</i> = 701; Study 2 with multiple daily assessments over seven consecutive workdays: <i>n</i> = 93, <i>k</i> = 471), even when controlling for task performance (Study 1) and beginning-of-day cognitive performance (Study 2). In two experiments, we then show that simulating task proactivity results in greater mental effort and lower routineness but not in greater ego depletion (Study 3: <i>N</i> = 318 and Study 4: <i>N</i> = 319) or increased self-control demands, -effort, or -motivation (Study 4). This provides support for our proposed cognitive pathway. Our findings enhance our understanding of the cognitively demanding nature of task proactivity and provide empirical support for its cognitive costs using a mental fatigue lens. They also suggest that the impact of a cognitively demanding activity like task proactivity may persist throughout the day and carry over to other tasks involving cognitive performance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15135,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001199","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Organizations are increasingly expecting individuals to engage in task proactivity, that is, to find better ways of doing their job. While prior research has demonstrated the benefits of task proactivity, little is known about its cognitive costs. To investigate this issue, we build theory on how task proactivity affects end-of-day cognitive performance. We propose that task proactivity involves deviating from established ways of working and engaging in cognitively demanding activities requiring high levels of mental effort, which manifest as an erosion of end-of-day cognitive performance. In two daily diary studies, we found that individuals engaging in task proactivity experience lower end-of-day cognitive performance (Study 1 over five consecutive workdays: n = 163, k = 701; Study 2 with multiple daily assessments over seven consecutive workdays: n = 93, k = 471), even when controlling for task performance (Study 1) and beginning-of-day cognitive performance (Study 2). In two experiments, we then show that simulating task proactivity results in greater mental effort and lower routineness but not in greater ego depletion (Study 3: N = 318 and Study 4: N = 319) or increased self-control demands, -effort, or -motivation (Study 4). This provides support for our proposed cognitive pathway. Our findings enhance our understanding of the cognitively demanding nature of task proactivity and provide empirical support for its cognitive costs using a mental fatigue lens. They also suggest that the impact of a cognitively demanding activity like task proactivity may persist throughout the day and carry over to other tasks involving cognitive performance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

额外努力的认知成本:追求进步与认知表现的关系。
组织越来越期待个人参与任务主动性,即寻找更好的方法来完成工作。虽然先前的研究已经证明了任务主动性的好处,但对其认知成本却知之甚少。为了研究这个问题,我们建立了任务主动性如何影响下班后认知表现的理论。我们提出,任务主动性是指偏离既定的工作方式,参与需要付出大量脑力的认知要求较高的活动,这表现为对日终认知绩效的侵蚀。在两项每日日记研究中,我们发现从事任务主动性活动的人日终认知表现较低(连续五个工作日的研究 1:n = 163,k = 701;连续七个工作日进行多次每日评估的研究 2:n = 93,k = 471),即使在控制了任务表现(研究 1)和日始认知表现(研究 2)的情况下也是如此。随后,我们在两项实验中表明,模拟任务主动性会导致更多的脑力劳动和更低的例行性,但不会导致更多的自我消耗(研究 3:N = 318 和研究 4:N = 319),也不会增加自我控制要求、努力或动机(研究 4)。这为我们提出的认知途径提供了支持。我们的研究结果加深了我们对任务主动性的认知要求性质的理解,并从心理疲劳的角度为其认知成本提供了经验支持。这些发现还表明,像任务主动性这样对认知要求较高的活动所产生的影响可能会持续一整天,并延续到其他涉及认知表现的任务中。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
17.60
自引率
6.10%
发文量
175
期刊介绍: The Journal of Applied Psychology® focuses on publishing original investigations that contribute new knowledge and understanding to fields of applied psychology (excluding clinical and applied experimental or human factors, which are better suited for other APA journals). The journal primarily considers empirical and theoretical investigations that enhance understanding of cognitive, motivational, affective, and behavioral psychological phenomena in work and organizational settings. These phenomena can occur at individual, group, organizational, or cultural levels, and in various work settings such as business, education, training, health, service, government, or military institutions. The journal welcomes submissions from both public and private sector organizations, for-profit or nonprofit. It publishes several types of articles, including: 1.Rigorously conducted empirical investigations that expand conceptual understanding (original investigations or meta-analyses). 2.Theory development articles and integrative conceptual reviews that synthesize literature and generate new theories on psychological phenomena to stimulate novel research. 3.Rigorously conducted qualitative research on phenomena that are challenging to capture with quantitative methods or require inductive theory building.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信