Estimating individual subjective values of emotion regulation strategies

Scheffel, Christoph; Zerna, Josephine; Gärtner, Anne; Dörfel, Denise; Strobel, Alexander

doi:10.1038/s41598-023-40034-7

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 83 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, this complex interplay emphasises that a chosen strategy must not only be effectiveanchored in the anticipation of goal achievement, which is the driving forcebut should also require minimal cognitive effort, which is the restraining force. This dynamic interaction resonates with the findings of Scheffel et al (2021Scheffel et al ( , 2023. During these studies, participants were given the opportunity to choose between several strategies and were then asked to provide reasons for their decision.…”

Section: Effects Of Cognitive Effort In the Selection Stagementioning

confidence: 53%

“…Troy et al (2018) found no effects of the strategies reappraisal and acceptance on self-reported effort, but on self-reported difficulty. Scheffel et al (2021Scheffel et al ( , 2023 found slight differences in subjective effort between strategies, but above all large inter-individual differences in effort during implementation. This observation is crucial, as effort is costly (Inzlicht et al, 2018).…”

Section: Effects Of Effort In the Implementation Stagementioning

confidence: 93%

“…The role of cognitive effort in emotion regulation 6 (Scheffel et al, 2021(Scheffel et al, , 2023. One important criterion according to which the strategies differ is therefore the required cognitive effort.…”

Section: Effects Of Cognitive Effort In the Selection Stagementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Numerous studies have investigated the assumption that emotion regulation necessitates the engagement of cognitive effort, thereby entailing the expenditure of cognitive resources (e.g., Gyurak et al, 2011;Kinner et al, 2017;Ortner et al, 2016;Troy et al, 2018;Webb et al, 2012). It has been shown that subjective effort is reported during the implementation of ER strategies (e.g., Scheffel et al, 2021Scheffel et al, , 2023Troy et al, 2018;Urry et al, 2009) and that this effort is expressed in peripheral physiological markers, in particular in the pupillary response (e.g., Johnstone et al, 2007;Kinner et al, 2017;Richey et al, 2015;Scheffel et al, 2021;Urry et al, 2006Urry et al, , 2009van Reekum et al, 2007).…”

Section: Effects Of Effort In the Implementation Stagementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The role of cognitive effort in emotion regulation 9 individuals in negative affective states tend to experience cognitive tasks as more effortful (Grahek et al, 2020;Inzlicht et al, 2015). Consequently, cognitive effort proves to be a central determinant for emotion regulation choice (Matthews et al, 2021;Scheffel et al, 2021Scheffel et al, , 2023Sheppes, 2020).…”

Section: Post-regulation Effects Of Effortmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The role of cognitive effort in emotion regulation

Scheffel,

Gärtner

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Empirical studies on emotion regulation (ER) have increasingly focused on understanding the role of cognitive effort throughout ER processes. Cognitive effort is an essential component of various ER stages: from the selection of ER strategies, through their implementation, to the post-regulation effects. During the selection phase, individuals prefer strategies that entail lower cognitive demands, striking a balance between efficacy and expended effort. Empirical evidence in the implementation phase underscores the necessity of cognitive effort in ER, as indicated by subjective reports and physiological markers. Moreover, the engagement of cognitive effort undergoes a cost-benefit analysis, wherein perceived costs may impede effective regulation and exacerbate negative emotions. Beyond immediate regulation, the effects of cognitive effort may manifest in subsequent resource depletion and influence the selection of future regulatory strategies. Understanding the intertwined interplay between cognitive effort and ER is crucial for elucidating crucial components during ER processing and their implications for individual well-being.

show abstract

Section: Effects Of Cognitive Effort In the Selection Stagementioning

confidence: 53%

Section: Effects Of Effort In the Implementation Stagementioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Effects Of Cognitive Effort In the Selection Stagementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Effects Of Effort In the Implementation Stagementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Post-regulation Effects Of Effortmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The role of cognitive effort in emotion regulation

Scheffel,

Gärtner

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Exaggerated frontoparietal control over cognitive effort-based decision-making in young women with anorexia nervosa

King,

Bernardoni,

Westbrook

et al. 2024

Mol Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effortful tasks are generally experienced as costly, but the value of work varies greatly across individuals and populations. While most mental health conditions are characterized by amotivation and effort avoidance, individuals with anorexia nervosa (AN) persistently engage in effortful behaviors that most people find unrewarding (food restriction, excessive exercise). Current models of AN differentially attribute such extreme weight-control behavior to altered reward responding and exaggerated cognitive control. In a novel test of these theoretical accounts, we employed an established cognitive effort discounting paradigm in combination with fMRI in young acutely underweight female patients with AN (n = 48) and age-matched healthy controls (HC; n = 48). Contrary to the hypothesis that individuals with AN would experience cognitive effort (operationalized as N-back task performance) as less costly than HC participants, groups did not differ in the subjective value (SV) of discounted rewards or in SV-related activation of brain regions involved in reward valuation. Rather, all group differences in both behavior (superior N-back performance in AN and associated effort ratings) and fMRI activation (increased SV-related frontoparietal activation during decision-making in AN even for easier choices) were more indicative of increased control. These findings suggest that while effort discounting may be relatively intact in AN, effort investment is high both when performing demanding tasks and during effort-based decision-making; highlighting cognitive overcontrol as an important therapeutic target. Future research should establish whether exaggerated control during effort-based decision-making persists after weight-recovery and explore learning the value of effort in AN with tasks involving disorder-relevant effort demands and rewards.

show abstract

Need for Cognition is associated with a preference for higher task load in effort discounting

Zerna,

Scheffel,

Kührt

et al. 2023

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When individuals set goals, they consider the subjective value (SV) of the anticipated reward and the required effort, a trade-off that is of great interest to psychological research. One approach to quantify the SVs of levels of difficulty of a cognitive task is the Cognitive Effort Discounting Paradigm by Westbrook and colleagues (2013). However, it fails to acknowledge the highly individual nature of effort, as it assumes a unidirectional, inverse relationship between task load and SVs. Therefore, it cannot map differences in effort perception that arise from traits like Need for Cognition, since individuals who enjoy effortful cognitive activities likely do not prefer the easiest level. We replicated the analysis of Westbrook and colleagues with an adapted version, the Cognitive and Affective Discounting (CAD) Paradigm. It quantifies SVs without assuming that the easiest level is preferred, thereby enabling the assessment of SVs for tasks without objective order of task load. Results show that many of the 116 participants preferred a more or the most difficult level. Variance in SVs was best explained by a declining logistic contrast of the $$n$$ n -back levels and by the accuracy of responses, while reaction time as a predictor was highly volatile depending on the preprocessing pipeline. Participants with higher Need for Cognition scores perceived higher $$n$$ n -back levels as less effortful and found them less aversive. Effects of Need for Cognition on SVs in lower levels did not reach significance, as group differences only emerged in higher levels. The CAD Paradigm appears to be well suited for assessing and analysing task preferences independent of the supposed objective task difficulty.Protocol registrationThe stage 1 protocol for this Registered Report was accepted in principle on August 19, 2022. The protocol, as accepted by the journal, can be found at: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/CPXTH.

show abstract

Estimating individual subjective values of emotion regulation strategies

Cited by 4 publications

References 83 publications

The role of cognitive effort in emotion regulation

The role of cognitive effort in emotion regulation

Exaggerated frontoparietal control over cognitive effort-based decision-making in young women with anorexia nervosa

Need for Cognition is associated with a preference for higher task load in effort discounting

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About