The influence of reward and loss outcomes after free- and forced-tasks on voluntary task choice.

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Victor Mittelstädt, Ian G Mackenzie, Hartmut Leuthold
{"title":"The influence of reward and loss outcomes after free- and forced-tasks on voluntary task choice.","authors":"Victor Mittelstädt, Ian G Mackenzie, Hartmut Leuthold","doi":"10.1007/s00426-024-02009-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In four experiments, we investigated the impact of outcomes and processing mode (free versus forced) on subsequent voluntary task-switching behavior. Participants freely chose between two tasks or were forced to perform one, and the feedback they received randomly varied after correct performance (reward or no-reward; loss or no-loss). In general, we reasoned that the most recently applied task goal is usually the most valued one, leading people to prefer task repetitions over switches. However, the task values might be additionally biased by previous outcomes and the previous processing mode. Indeed, negatively reinforcing tasks with no-reward or losses generally resulted in more subsequent switches. Additionally, participants demonstrated a stronger attachment to free- compared to forced-tasks, as indicated by more switches when the previous task was forced, suggesting that people generally value free over forced-choice task goals. Moreover, the reward manipulation had a greater influence on switching behavior following free- compared to forced-tasks in Exp. 1 and Exp. 3, suggesting a stronger emphasis on evaluating rewarding outcomes associated with free-task choices. However, this inflationary effect on task choice seemed to be limited to reward and situations where task choice and performance more strongly overlap. Specifically, there was no evidence that switching behavior was differentially influenced after free-and forced-task as a function of losses (Exp. 2) or reward when task choice and task performance were separated (Exp. 4). Overall, the results provide new insights into how the valuation of task goals based on choice freedom and outcome feedback can influence voluntary task choices.</p>","PeriodicalId":48184,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung","volume":" ","pages":"2059-2079"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11450031/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-024-02009-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In four experiments, we investigated the impact of outcomes and processing mode (free versus forced) on subsequent voluntary task-switching behavior. Participants freely chose between two tasks or were forced to perform one, and the feedback they received randomly varied after correct performance (reward or no-reward; loss or no-loss). In general, we reasoned that the most recently applied task goal is usually the most valued one, leading people to prefer task repetitions over switches. However, the task values might be additionally biased by previous outcomes and the previous processing mode. Indeed, negatively reinforcing tasks with no-reward or losses generally resulted in more subsequent switches. Additionally, participants demonstrated a stronger attachment to free- compared to forced-tasks, as indicated by more switches when the previous task was forced, suggesting that people generally value free over forced-choice task goals. Moreover, the reward manipulation had a greater influence on switching behavior following free- compared to forced-tasks in Exp. 1 and Exp. 3, suggesting a stronger emphasis on evaluating rewarding outcomes associated with free-task choices. However, this inflationary effect on task choice seemed to be limited to reward and situations where task choice and performance more strongly overlap. Specifically, there was no evidence that switching behavior was differentially influenced after free-and forced-task as a function of losses (Exp. 2) or reward when task choice and task performance were separated (Exp. 4). Overall, the results provide new insights into how the valuation of task goals based on choice freedom and outcome feedback can influence voluntary task choices.

Abstract Image

自由任务和强迫任务后的奖励和损失结果对自愿任务选择的影响。
在四项实验中,我们研究了结果和处理模式(自由与强迫)对后续自愿任务转换行为的影响。参与者在两个任务之间自由选择,或被迫完成一个任务,正确完成任务后,他们收到的反馈随机变化(奖励或无奖励;损失或无损失)。一般来说,我们的推理是,最近应用的任务目标通常是最有价值的目标,这导致人们更喜欢任务重复而不是任务切换。然而,任务价值可能还会受到先前结果和先前处理模式的影响。事实上,无回报或损失的负强化任务通常会导致更多的后续转换。此外,与强迫任务相比,受试者对自由任务表现出更强的依恋,这表现在当前一个任务是强迫任务时,受试者会进行更多的转换,这表明人们通常更看重自由选择任务目标,而不是强迫选择任务目标。此外,在实验 1 和实验 3 中,与强迫任务相比,奖励操作对自由任务后的转换行为影响更大,这表明人们更重视评估与自由任务选择相关的奖励结果。然而,这种对任务选择的膨胀效应似乎仅限于奖励和任务选择与成绩重叠较多的情况。具体来说,当任务选择和任务表现分开时,没有证据表明自由任务和强迫任务后的转换行为会受到损失(实验 2)或奖励(实验 4)的不同影响。总之,这些结果为我们提供了新的见解,即基于选择自由和结果反馈的任务目标估值如何影响自愿任务选择。
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
5.10
自引率
8.70%
发文量
137
期刊介绍: Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung publishes articles that contribute to a basic understanding of human perception, attention, memory, and action. The Journal is devoted to the dissemination of knowledge based on firm experimental ground, but not to particular approaches or schools of thought. Theoretical and historical papers are welcome to the extent that they serve this general purpose; papers of an applied nature are acceptable if they contribute to basic understanding or serve to bridge the often felt gap between basic and applied research in the field covered by the Journal.
×
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