Physical load affects duration judgments: A meta-analytic review

Block, Richard A.; Hancock, Peter A.; Zakay, Dan

doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.01.002

Cited by 24 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This explanation is convincing and a good account of their finding of enhanced temporal binding under effort. Nevertheless, their finding is contrary to what one might predict given that it is known that physical effort depletes cognitive resources, which is associated with time expansion, not compression, and that the depletion of cognitive resources reduces motor control and awareness -elements fundamental for agency ascription (Block et al, 2010;Block et al, 2016;Huxhold et al, 2006;Kannape et al, 2014). Hence, it EFFORT DISRUPTS IMPLICIT AGENCY 9 might be expected that the opposite effect would be observed; that exertion would result in disrupted -not enhanced -intentional binding.…”

Section: Sense Of Agency and Effortmentioning

confidence: 75%

“…Importantly, this effect was not observed for conditions in which agency was not present. A commonality across each of our experiments is that we can assume that in the high load conditions, they either directly (Experiment 3) or indirectly (Experiments 1 and 2) draw on cognitive resources (Block et al, 2016). If we assume that agency ascription is itself cognitively costly, for reason we explain below, then under conditions of compromised cognitive resource availability, such as high effort, temporal binding would be weaker.…”

Section: Potential Mechanisms For Reduced Sense Of Agency Under Effortmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…A recent meta-analysis investigating the effect of physical load on duration judgements revealed that physical workload results in longer perceived durations (Block, Hancock & Zakay, 2016; seven studies spanning from 1963 -2011). However, the impact of effort on perceived duration need not be experiential, as stimuli that allude to motion, action, or exertion also elongate perceived durations.…”

Section: Effort Disrupts Implicit Agencymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Physical and mental effort disrupts the implicit sense of agency

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated the effect of effort on implicit agency ascription for actions performed under varying levels of physical effort or cognitive load. People are able to estimate the interval between two events accurately, but they underestimate the interval between their own actions and their outcomes. This effect is known as 'intentional binding', and may provide feedback regarding the consequences of our actions. Concurrently with the interval reproduction task, our participants pulled sports resistance bands at high and low resistance levels (Experiments 1 and 2), or performed a working memory task with high and low set-sizes (Experiment 3).Intentional binding was greater under low than high effort. When the effort was task-related (Experiment 1), this effect depended on the individual's explicit appraisal of exertion, while the effect of effort was evident at the group level when the effort was task-unrelated (physical, Experiment 2; mental, Experiment 3). These findings imply that the process of intentional binding is compromised when cognitive resources are depleted, either through physical or mental strain. We discuss this notion in relation to the integration of direct sensorimotor feedback with signals of agency and other instances of cognitive resource depletion and action control during strain.Keywords: Sense of agency, temporal binding, intentional binding, experience of effort, time perception. EFFORT DISRUPTS IMPLICIT AGENCY 3 Physical and mental effort disrupts the implicit sense of agencyIt is important that the human motor system can efficiently process events which are the result of its own actions, and to discriminate these from events in the world for which it is not responsible. For instance, if I kick a ball and it knocks over and smashes a vase of flowers, I know my action of kicking the ball was responsible for the vase smashing. Selfauthored events like this tend to be easy to identify and this feeling that 'I did it' is known as a sense of agency. Some actions are more effortful than others; kicking a ball as hard as one can might break a vase, but so might brushing one's arm against it as one walks past it precariously positioned near the edge of a table. Both these actions have the same outcome, but might require the action monitoring system to respond differently in order to correctly ascribe agency. Here, we tested the role of physical and mental effort on the ascription of sense of agency, using an implicit measure.

show abstract

Section: Sense Of Agency and Effortmentioning

confidence: 75%

Section: Potential Mechanisms For Reduced Sense Of Agency Under Effortmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Effort Disrupts Implicit Agencymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Physical and mental effort disrupts the implicit sense of agency

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(2009) assume that holding heavy objects may lead to a higher degree of cognitive elaboration, thereby supposing a link between physical and cognitive effort. A recent meta-analytic review on the role of physical workload in the perception of time (Block, Hancock, & Zakay, 2016) supports the view that physical effort has similar effects on task perception as cognitive effort, as both types of workload demand attention and therefore constrain cognitive processing. Relatedly, research on the role of arousal on cognition has established two important findings: (a) There is evidence for the claim that learning performance is highest at an optimum point of medium arousal (Teigen, 1994; Yerkes & Dodson, 1908), and (b) different levels of arousal are considered to trigger different modes of information processing (Eysenck, 1976; Schwabe & Wolf, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Bodily Effort Enhances Learning and Metacognition: Investigating the Relation Between Physical Effort and Cognition Using Dual-Process Models of Embodiment

Skulmowski

Rey

2017

ACP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent embodiment research revealed that cognitive processes can be influenced by bodily cues. Some of these cues were found to elicit disparate effects on cognition. For instance, weight sensations can inhibit problem-solving performance, but were shown to increase judgments regarding recall probability (judgments of learning; JOLs) in memory tasks. We investigated the effects of physical effort on learning and metacognition by conducting two studies in which we varied whether a backpack was worn or not while 20 nouns were to be learned. Participants entered a JOL for each word and completed a recall test. Experiment 1 (N = 18) revealed that exerting physical effort by wearing a backpack led to higher JOLs for easy nouns, without a notable effect on difficult nouns. Participants who wore a backpack reached higher recall scores. Therefore, physical effort may act as a form of desirable difficulty during learning. In Experiment 2 (N = 30), the influence of physical effort on JOL s and learning disappeared when more difficult nouns were to be learned, implying that a high cognitive load may diminish bodily effects. These findings suggest that physical effort mainly influences superficial modes of thought and raise doubts concerning the explanatory power of metaphor-centered accounts of embodiment for higher-level cognition.

show abstract

“…As with the related case example, interestingly, also physical load can interfere with mental workload. Since also physical load draws from the same underlying energy pool, participants in various experiments estimated the duration of the experiment (i.e., a task consuming cognitive resources) as shorter when they were, e.g., exerting physical effort on a dynamometer (for a meta-analysis, see Block et al 2016).…”

Section: Contrary Casementioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding mental workload: from a clarifying concept analysis toward an implementable framework

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The growing need for mental workload (MWL) optimization on the shop floor yields an impressive increase in theoretical and applied references to the concept of mental workload (Young et al. 2014). However, do we really understand and agree upon what mental workload exactly is? Does it include emotional load? Can we rely upon an explanatory framework? The present account first runs a critical concept analysis on mental workload, based on the Walker and Avant (2011) method. Results show that existing definitions and theoretical accounts arbitrarily include and exclude defining variables and describe these variables on various levels of abstraction, misuse pivotal terms such as mediation and moderation, and do not theoretically explicitate the role of yet repeatedly operationalized emotional load variables such as frustration. We therefore clarify the concept by disentangling MWL into its antecedents, defining attributes and consequences. Next, we derive a clearcut conceptual definition and present a generic explanatory frameworkthe latter extended with insights from Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller 1988; 1994). We conclude with a set of suggestions for future research and practice. Next to contributing to the theoretical clarification of this hallmark concept, the concept analysis and derived explanatory framework, as proposed, can foster solid research practices and support practitioners in contextualizing MWL-assessment and in effectively optimizing MWL.

show abstract

Physical load affects duration judgments: A meta-analytic review

Cited by 24 publications

References 33 publications

Physical and mental effort disrupts the implicit sense of agency

Physical and mental effort disrupts the implicit sense of agency

Bodily Effort Enhances Learning and Metacognition: Investigating the Relation Between Physical Effort and Cognition Using Dual-Process Models of Embodiment

Understanding mental workload: from a clarifying concept analysis toward an implementable framework

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About