The Effort Paradox: Effort Is Both Costly and Valued

Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2018, Pages 337-349

  Inzlicht, Michael ^a,b   Shenhav, Amitai ^c   Olivola, Christopher Y ^d,e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

cognitive control; cognitive dissonance; decision making; effort; learned industriousness; need for cognition; value

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGY; COGNITIVE SYSTEMS;

COGNITIVE CONTROL; COGNITIVE DISSONANCE; EFFORT; LEARNED INDUSTRIOUSNESS; NEED FOR COGNITIONS; VALUE;

DECISION MAKING;

ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; EXECUTIVE FUNCTION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MOTIVATION; ANIMAL; COGNITION; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY;

ANIMALS; HUMANS; MOTIVATION; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; VOLITION;

EID: 85042186452     PISSN: 13646613     EISSN: 1879307X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2018.01.007     Document Type: Review

References (133)

1. Kurzban, R., The sense of effort. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 7 (2016), 67–70.
2. Dreisbach, G., Fischer, R., Conflicts as aversive signals for control adaptation. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 24 (2015), 255–260.
3. Saunders, B., et al. The emotive nature of conflict monitoring in the medial prefrontal cortex. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 119 (2016), 31–40.
4. Kool, W., et al. Decision making and the avoidance of cognitive demand. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 139 (2010), 665–682.
5. Frederick, S., Cognitive reflection and decision making. J. Econ. Perspect. 19 (2005), 25–42.
6. Chater, N., Vitanyi, P., Simplicity: a unifying principle in cognitive science?. Trends Cogn. Sci. 7 (2003), 19–22.
7. Chater, N., Brown, G.D., Scale-invariance as a unifying psychological principle. Cognition 69 (1999), B17–B24.
8. Hull, C.L., Principles of Behavior: An Introduction to Behavior Theory. 1943, Appleton-Century-Crofts.
9. Loewenstein, G.F., Because it is there: the challenge of mountaineering…for utility theory. Kyklos 52 (1999), 315–344.
10. Eisenberger, R., Learned industriousness. Psychol. Rev. 99 (1992), 248–267.
11. Norton, M.I., et al. The IKEA effect: when labor leads to love. J. Consum. Psychol. 22 (2012), 453–460.
12. Hernandez Lallement, J., et al. Effort increases sensitivity to reward and loss magnitude in the human brain. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 9 (2014), 342–349.
13. Ma, Q., et al. I endeavor to make it: effort increases valuation of subsequent monetary reward. Behav. Brain Res. 261 (2013), 1–7.
14. Johnson, A.W., Gallagher, M., Greater effort boosts the affective taste properties of food. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 278 (2011), 1450–1456.
15. Alessandri, J., et al. Cognitive dissonance in children: justification of effort or contrast?. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 15 (2008), 673–677.
16. Benozio, A., Diesendruck, G., From effort to value. Psychol. Sci. 26 (2015), 1423–1429.
17. Smith, A., The Wealth of Nations. 1776, Bantam Classics Annotated edition (March 4 2003).
18. Atkinson, J.W., Motivational determinants of risk taking behavior. Psychol. Rev. 64 (1957), 359–372.
19. Shenhav, A., et al. Toward a rational and mechanistic account of mental effort. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 40 (2017), 99–124.
20. Westbrook, A., Braver, T.S.T., Cognitive effort: a neuroeconomic approach. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 15 (2015), 395–415.
21. Pessiglione, M., et al. Why not try harder? Computational approach to motivation deficits in neuro-psychiatric diseases. Brain, 2017, 10.1093/brain/awx278 Published online November 29, 2017.
22. Bonnelle, V., et al. Individual differences in premotor brain systems underlie behavioral apathy. Cereb. Cortex 26 (2016), 807–819.
23. Shenhav, A., et al. The expected value of control: an integrative theory of anterior cingulate cortex function. Neuron 79 (2013), 217–240.
24. Inzlicht, M., et al. Emotional foundations of cognitive control. Trends Cogn. Sci. 19 (2015), 126–132.
25. Sayali, C., Badre, D., Neural systems of cognitive demand avoidance. BioRxiv, 2017, 10.1101/211375 Published online October 31, 2017.
26. Cacioppo, J.T., et al. Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: the life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychol. Bull. 119 (1996), 197–253.
27. Schrift, R.Y., et al. Complicating decisions: the work ethic heuristic and the construction of effortful decisions. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 145 (2016), 807–829.
28. Lewis, M., Psychological effect of effort. Psychol. Bull. 64 (1965), 183–190.
29. Kahneman, D., Effort and Attention. 1973, Prentice-Hall.
30. Dunn, T.L., et al. Anticipating cognitive effort: roles of perceived error-likelihood and time demands. Psychol. Res., 2017, 10.1007/s00426-017-0943-x Published online November 13, 2017.
31. Brehm, J.W., Self, E., The intensity of motivation. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 40 (1989), 109–131.
32. van Boxtel, A., Jessurun, M., Amplitude and bilateral coherency of facial and jaw-elevator EMG activity as an index of effort during a two-choice serial reaction task. Psychophysiology 30 (1993), 589–604.
33. de Morree, H.M., Marcora, S.M., The face of effort: frowning muscle activity reflects effort during a physical task. Biol. Psychol. 85 (2010), 377–382.
34. Grezes, J., et al. Brain mechanisms for inferring deceit in the actions of others. J. Neurosci. 24 (2004), 5500–5505.
35. Tidoni, E., et al. Action simulation plays a critical role in deceptive action recognition. J. Neurosci. 33 (2013), 611–623.
36. Hobson, N.M., et al. When novel rituals lead to intergroup bias: evidence from economic games and neurophysiology. Psychol. Sci. 28 (2017), 733–750.
37. Bigman, Y.E., Tamir, M., The road to heaven is paved with effort: perceived effort amplifies moral judgment. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 145 (2016), 1654–1669.
38. Dik, G., Aarts, H., Behavioral cues to others’ motivation and goal pursuits: the perception of effort facilitates goal inference and contagion. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 43 (2007), 727–737.
39. Hoshikawa, Y., Yamamoto, Y., Effects of Stroop color-word conflict test on the autonomic nervous system responses. Am. J. Physiol. 272 (1997), H1113–H1121.
40. Critchley, H.D., et al. Human cingulate cortex and autonomic control: converging neuroimaging and clinical evidence. Brain 126 (2003), 2139–2152.
41. Hajcak, G., et al. To err is autonomic: error-related brain potentials, ANS activity, and post-error compensatory behavior. Psychophysiology 40 (2003), 895–903.
42. Silvestrini, N., Psychological and neural mechanisms associated with effort-related cardiovascular reactivity and cognitive control: an integrative approach. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 119 (2017), 11–18.
43. Dreisbach, G., Fischer, R., Conflicts as aversive signals. Brain Cogn. 78 (2012), 94–98.
44. Elkins-Brown, N., et al. Error-related electromyographic activity over the corrugator supercilii is associated with neural performance monitoring. Psychophysiology 53 (2016), 159–170.
45. Inzlicht, M., Al-Khindi, T., ERN and the placebo: a misattribution approach to studying the arousal properties of the error-related negativity. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 141 (2012), 799–807.
46. Saunders, B., et al. What does cognitive control feel like? Effective and ineffective cognitive control is associated with divergent phenomenology. Psychophysiology 52 (2015), 1205–1217.
47. Holroyd, C.B., Yeung, N., Motivation of extended behaviors by anterior cingulate cortex. Trends Cogn. Sci. 16 (2012), 122–128.
48. Cavanagh, J.F., Frank, M.J., Frontal theta as a mechanism for cognitive control. Trends Cogn. Sci. 18 (2014), 414–421.
49. McGuire, J.T., Botvinick, M.M., Prefrontal cortex, cognitive control, and the registration of decision costs. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 107 (2010), 7922–7926.
50. Botvinick, M.M., et al. Effort discounting in human nucleus accumbens. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 9 (2009), 16–27.
51. Cocker, P.J., et al. Sensitivity to cognitive effort mediates psychostimulant effects on a novel rodent cost/benefit decision-making task. Neuropsychopharmacology 37 (2012), 1825–1837.
52. Inzlicht, M., et al. Why self-control seems (but may not be) limited. Trends Cogn. Sci. 18 (2014), 127–133.
53. Kool, W., Botvinick, M., A labor/leisure tradeoff in cognitive control. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 143 (2014), 131–141.
54. Hagger, M.S., et al. A multilab preregistered replication of the ego-depletion effect. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 11 (2016), 546–573.
55. Kurzban, R., et al. An opportunity cost model of subjective effort and task performance. Behav. Brain Sci. 36 (2013), 661–679.
56. Inzlicht, M., Berkman, E., Six questions for the resource model of control (and some answers). Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 9/10 (2015), 1–14.
57. Blain, B., et al. Neural mechanisms underlying the impact of daylong cognitive work on economic decisions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 113 (2016), 6967–6972.
58. Randles, D., et al. A pre-registered naturalistic observation of within domain mental fatigue and domain-general depletion of self-control. PLoS One, 12, 2017, e0182980.
59. Boksem, M.A.S., et al. Mental fatigue, motivation and action monitoring. Biol. Psychol. 72 (2006), 123–132.
60. Brewer, G.A., et al. Examining depletion theories under conditions of within-task transfer. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 146 (2017), 988–1008.
61. Westbrook, A., et al. What is the subjective cost of cognitive effort? Load, trait, and aging effects revealed by economic preference. PLoS One, 8, 2013, e68210.
62. Apps, M.A.J., et al. The role of cognitive effort in subjective reward devaluation and risky decision-making. Sci. Rep., 5, 2015, 16880.
63. Ainslie, G.W., Impulse control in pigeons. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 21 (1974), 485–489.
64. Olivola, C.Y., Wang, S.W., Patience auctions: the impact of time vs. money bidding on elicited discount rates. Exp. Econ. 19 (2016), 864–885.
65. Chong, T.T.J., et al. Neurocomputational mechanisms underlying subjective valuation of effort costs. PLoS Biol. 15 (2017), 1–28.
66. Festinger, L., A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. 1957, Stanford University Press.
67. Cooper, J., Cognitive Dissonance: Fifty Years of a Classic Theory. 2007, SAGE.
68. Aronson, E., Mills, J., The effect of severity of initiation on liking for a group. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 59 (1959), 177–181.
69. Mochon, D., et al. Bolstering and restoring feelings of competence via the IKEA effect. Int. J. Res. Mark. 29 (2012), 363–369.
70. Lane, R.E., Work as “disutility” and money as “happiness”: cultural origins of a basic market error. J. Socio. Econ. 21 (1992), 43–64.
71. Kaufman, B.E., Expanding the behavioral foundations of labor economics. Ind. Labor Relations Rev. 52 (1999), 361–392.
72. Bem, D.J., Self-perceptıon: an alternative interpretation of cognitive dissonance phenomena. Psychol. Rev. 74 (1967), 183–200.
73. Thaler, R., Toward a positive theory of consumer choice. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 1 (1980), 39–60.
74. Arkes, H.R., Blumer, C., The psychology of sunk cost. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 35 (1985), 124–140.
75. Olivola, C.Y. The interpersonal sunk-cost effect. Psychol. Sci. (in press).
76. Muehlbacher, S., Kirchler, E., Origin of endowments in public good games: the impact of effort on contributions. J. Neurosci. Psychol. Econ. 2 (2009), 59–67.
77. Arkes, H.R., et al. The psychology of windfall gains. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 59 (1994), 331–347.
78. Kameda, T., et al. Social sharing and risk reduction exploring a computational algorithm for the psychology of windfall gains. Evol. Hum. Behav. 23 (2002), 11–33.
79. Wang, L., et al. Effort provides its own reward: endeavors reinforce subjective expectation and evaluation of task performance. Exp. Brain Res. 235 (2017), 1107–1118.
80. Zink, C.F., et al. Human striatal responses to monetary reward depend on saliency. Neuron 42 (2004), 509–517.
81. Elliott, R., et al. Instrumental responding for rewards is associated with enhanced neuronal response in subcortical reward systems. Neuroimage 21 (2004), 984–990.
82. Schouppe, N., et al. The role of the striatum in effort-based decision-making in the absence of reward. J. Neurosci. 34 (2014), 2148–2154.
83. Inglis, I., et al. Free food or earned food? A review and fuzzy model of contrafreeloading. Anim. Behav. 53 (1997), 1171–1191.
84. Clement, T.S., et al. “Work ethic” in pigeons: reward value is directly related to the effort or time required to obtain the reward. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 7 (2000), 100–106.
85. Pompilio, L., et al. State-dependent learned valuation drives choice in an invertebrate. Science 311 (2006), 1613–1615.
86. Lydall, E.S., et al. Rats place greater value on rewards produced by high effort: an animal analogue of the “effort justification” effect. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 46 (2010), 1134–1137.
87. Lawrence, D.H., Festinger, L., Deterrents and Reinforcement. The Psychology of Insufficient Reward. 1962, Stanford University Press.
88. Kacelnik, A., Marsh, B., Cost can increase preference in starlings. Anim. Behav. 63 (2002), 245–250.
89. Zentall, T.R., Justification of effort by humans and pigeons: cognitive dissonance or contrast?. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 19 (2010), 296–300.
90. Pompilio, L., Kacelnik, A., Context-dependent utility overrides absolute memory as a determinant of choice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107 (2010), 508–512.
91. Olivola, C., Shafir, E., The martyrdom effect: when pain and effort increase prosocial contributions. J. Behav. Decis. Mak. 26 (2013), 91–105.
92. Olivola, C.Y., When noble means hinder noble ends: the benefits and costs of a preference for martyrdom in altruism. Oppenheimer, D.M., Olivola, C.Y., (eds.) The Science of Giving: Experimental Approaches to the Study of Charity, 2011, Taylor & Francis, 49–62.
93. Olivola, C.Y. and Shafir, E. Blood, sweat, and cheers: the martyrdom effect increases willingness to sponsor others’ painful and effortful prosocial acts, Published online 13 January 2018. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3101447.
94. Eisenberger, R., et al. Fixed-ratio schedules increase generalized self-control: preference for large rewards despite high effort or punishment. J. Exp. Psychol. Anim. Behav. Process. 15 (1989), 383–392.
95. Eisenberger, R., et al. Transfer of effort across behaviors. Learn. Motiv. 10 (1979), 178–197.
96. Wong, P.T.P., Amsel, A., Prior fixed ratio training and durable persistence in rats. Anim. Learn. Behav. 4 (1976), 461–466.
97. Eisenberger, R., Leonard, J.M., Effects of conceptual task difficulty on generalized persistence. Am. J. Psychol. 93 (1980), 285–298.
98. Eisenberger, R., Adornetto, M., Generalized self-control of delay and effort. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 51 (1986), 1020–1031.
99. Cacioppo, J.T., Petty, R.E., The need for cognition. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 42 (1982), 116–131.
100. Sandra, D., Otto, A.R., Cognitive capacity limitations and need for cognition differentially predict reward-induced cognitive effort expenditure. Cognition 172 (2018), 101–106.
101. Weber, M., The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. 1920, Penguin.
102. Kruger, J., et al. The effort heuristic. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 40 (2004), 91–98.
103. Loewenstein, G., Issacharoff, S., Source dependence in the valuation of objects. J. Behav. Decis. Mak. 7 (1994), 157–168.
104. Csikszentmihalyi, M., Flow and the Foundations of Positive Psychology. 2014, Springer.
105. Liu, W., Aaker, J., The happiness of giving: the time-ask effect. J. Consum. Res. 35 (2008), 543–557.
106. Richter, M., et al. Three decades of research on motivational intensity theory. Adv. Motiv. Sci. 3 (2016), 149–186.
107. Elster, J., Sour Grapes: Studies in the Subversion of Rationality. 1983, Cambridge University Press.
108. Eisenberger, R., et al. Effects of task variety on generalized effort. J. Educ. Psychol. 74 (1982), 499–505.
109. Galla, B.M., Duckworth, A.L., More than resisting temptation: beneficial habits mediate the relationship between self-control and positive life outcomes. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 109 (2015), 508–525.
110. Inzlicht, M., et al. Exploring the mechanisms of self-control improvement. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 23 (2014), 302–307.
111. Schmeichel, B.J., Tang, D., Individual differences in executive functioning and their relationship to emotional processes and responses. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 24 (2015), 93–98.
112. Axsom, D., Cognitive dissonance and behavior change in psychotherapy. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 25 (1989), 234–252.
113. Bjork, E.L., Bjork, R.A., et al. Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning. Gernsbacher, M.A., (eds.) Psychology and the Real World: Essays Illustrating Fundamental Contributions to Society, 2011, Worth Publishers, 55–64.
114. Melby-Lervåg, M., Hulme, C., Is working memory training effective? A meta-analytic review. Dev. Psychol. 49 (2013), 270–291.
115. Soveri, A., et al. Working memory training revisited: a multi-level meta-analysis of n-back training studies. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 24 (2017), 1077–1096.
116. Lieder, F., Griffiths, T.L., Helping people make better decisions using optimal gamification. Proceedings of the 38th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 2016, 2075–2080.
117. Ariely, D., et al. Doing good or doing well? Image motivation and monetary incentives in behaving prosocially. Am. Econ. Rev. 99 (2009), 544–555.
118. Eastwood, J.D., et al. The unengaged mind: defining boredom in terms of attention. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 7 (2012), 482–495.
119. Lipps, T., Leitfaden der Psychologie [Manual of Psychology]. 1903, Wilhelm Engelman Verlag (in German).
120. Nederkoorn, C., et al. Self-inflicted pain out of boredom. Psychiatry Res. 237 (2016), 127–132.
121. Fisherl, C.D., Boredom at work: a neglected concept. Hum. Relations 46 (1993), 395–417.
122. Hill, A.B., Perkins, R.E., Towards a model of boredom. Br. J. Psychol. 76 (1985), 235–240.
123. Schmidhuber, J., A possibility for implementing curiosity and boredom in model-building neural controllers. Meyer, J.A., Wilson, S.W., (eds.) Proceedings of the International Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior: From Animals to Animats, 1991, MIT Press/Bradford Books, 222–227.
124. Geana, A., et al. Boredom, information-seeking and exploration. Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 2016.
125. Moynihan, A.B., et al. Boredom increases impulsiveness: a meaning-regulation perspective. Soc. Psychol. (Gott) 48 (2017), 293–309.
126. Milyavskaya, M., et al. Reward sensitivity following boredom and cognitive effort: a high-powered neurophysiological investigation. BioRxiv, 2017, 10.1101/177220 Published online August 16, 2017.
127. Wittmann, B.C., et al. Striatal activity underlies novelty-based choice in humans. Neuron 58 (2008), 967–973.
128. Krebs, R.M., et al. The novelty exploration bonus and its attentional modulation. Neuropsychologia 47 (2009), 2272–2281.
129. Kool, W., et al. Cognitive control as cost-benefit decision making. Egner, T., (eds.) Wiley Handbook of Cognitive Control, 2017, John Wiley & Sons, 167–189.
130. Tolman, E.C., Principles of performance. Psychol. Rev. 62 (1955), 315–326.
131. Shenhav, A., et al. Dorsal anterior cingulate cortex and the value of control. Nat. Neurosci. 19 (2016), 1286–1291.
132. Camerer, C.F., Hogarth, R.M., The effects of financial incentives in experiments: a review and capital labor production framework. J. Risk Uncertain. 19 (1999), 7–42.
133. Bonner, S.E., Sprinkle, G.B., The effects of monetary incentives on effort and task performance: theories, evidence, and a framework for research. Accounting. Organ. Soc. 27 (2002), 303–345.