ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2021
Learning to Overexert Cognitive Control in a Stroop Task.
Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adaptive behavior is guided by integrated representations of controlled and non-controlled information.eLife · 2026Article
- Adaptive habits: understanding executive function and its development.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2026Review
- Drug cue enhances response conflict and reduces conflict adaptation in methamphetamine addiction.Psychological research · 2026Article
- Understanding human metacontrol and its pathologies using deep neural networks.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Adaptive behavior is guided by integrated representations of controlled and non-controlled information.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Learning expectations shape cognitive control allocation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Characterizing age-related change in learning the value of cognitive effort.Journal of experimental psychology. General · 2025Article
- High stakes slow responding, but do not help overcome Pavlovian biases in humans.Learning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.) · 2024Article
- Trying Harder: How Cognitive Effort Sculpts Neural Representations during Working Memory.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024Article
- Electroencephalography Spectral-power Volatility Predicts Problem-solving Outcomes.Journal of cognitive neuroscience · 2024Article
- Wagers for work: Decomposing the costs of cognitive effort.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Humans reconfigure target and distractor processing to address distinct task demands.Psychological review · 2024Article
- Reinforcement learning of adaptive control strategies.Communications psychology · 2024Article
- Trying harder: how cognitive effort sculpts neural representations during working memory.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Task sets define boundaries of learned cognitive flexibility in list-wide proportion switch manipulations.Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance · 2023Article
- Learning how to reason and deciding when to decide.The Behavioral and brain sciences · 2023Article
- Use of experimental medicine approaches for the development of novel psychiatric treatments based on orexin receptor modulation.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2023Review
- Learning when effort matters: neural dynamics underlying updating and adaptation to changes in performance efficacy.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2023Article
- Differential effects of intra-modal and cross-modal reward value on perception: ERP evidence.PloS one · 2023Article
- Cognitive Control as a Multivariate Optimization Problem.Journal of cognitive neuroscience · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
How do people learn when to allocate how much cognitive control to which task? According to the Learned Value of Control (LVOC) model, people learn to predict the value of alternative control allocations from features of a situation. This suggests that people may generalize the value of control learned in one situation to others with shared features, even when demands for control are different. This makes the intriguing prediction that what a person learned in one setting could cause them to misestimate the need for, and potentially overexert, control in another setting, even if this harms their performance. To test this prediction, we had participants perform a novel variant of the Stroop task in which, on each trial, they could choose to either name the color (more control-demanding) or read the word (more automatic). Only one of these tasks was rewarded each trial and could be predicted by one or more stimulus features (the color and/or word). Participants first learned colors and then words that predicted the rewarded task. Then, we tested how these learned feature associations transferred to novel stimuli with some overlapping features. The stimulus-task-reward associations were designed so that for certain combinations of stimuli, transfer of learned feature associations would incorrectly predict that more highly rewarded task would be color-naming, even though the actually rewarded task was word-reading and therefore did not require engaging control. Our results demonstrated that participants overexerted control for these stimuli, providing support for the feature-based learning mechanism described by the LVOC model.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.