Author:
Maydych Viktoria,Pöschel Hanna,Kübler Sebastian,Schubert Torsten
Abstract
AbstractPrevious research demonstrated motivation-control interactions in task switching. However, motivational effects on switch costs have been mostly examined using monetary rewards. Here, we investigated whether stimulus material linked to food and fasting affect control processes in task switching. We predicted that switching to the task comprising food stimuli would be facilitated, which should result in lower switch costs for this task, and that these effects would be stronger with higher motivational salience of the food stimuli, i.e. in hungry individuals and/or individuals with restrictive eating. Participants switched between categorising food items as sweet or savoury and digits as odd or even in two task-switching paradigms: an alternating runs and a voluntary task switching. Hunger was induced by 14 h fasting in the experimental compared to the control group. Results showed lower switch costs for the motivational-affective food task in both task-switching paradigms and in both groups. Switch costs for the neutral digit task were significantly higher in the fasting group compared to the control group in alternating runs task switching only. Individual differences in restrictive eating were related negatively but not significantly to the size of the switch costs. All in all, the results demonstrate an impact of motivational-affective stimuli on cognitive control in task switching and suggest a potential modulatory role of motivational states, though the findings need to be replicated.
Funder
German research council
Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),Developmental and Educational Psychology,Experimental and Cognitive Psychology,General Medicine
Reference53 articles.
1. Adcock, R. A., Thangavel, A., Whitfield-Gabrieli, S., Knutson, B., & Gabrieli, J. D. (2006). Reward-motivated learning: Mesolimbic activation precedes memory formation. Neuron, 50(3), 507–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2006.03.036
2. Allport, D. A., Styles, E. A., & Hsieh, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 421–452). The MIT Press.
3. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM-5) (5th ed.). American Psychiatric Publishing.
4. Arrington, C. M., & Logan, G. D. (2004). The cost of a voluntary task switch. Psychological Science, 15(9), 610–615.
5. Arrington, C. M., & Logan, G. D. (2005). Voluntary task switching: Chasing the elusive homunculus. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(4), 683–702. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.31.4.683