ArticleInternational journal of methods in psychiatric research2023
Are effort-based decision-making tasks worth the effort?-A study on the associations between effort-based decision-making tasks and self-report measures.
Article in International journal of methods in psychiatric research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Shared and distinct features of common effort-based decision-making paradigms and their relation to brain structure and neuropsychiatric conditions: An integrated narrative review.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2026Review
- Computational Phenotyping of Effort-Based Decision Making in Unmedicated Adults With Remitted Depression.Biological psychiatry. Cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging · 2025Article
- Are effort-based decision-making tasks worth the effort?-A study on the associations between effort-based decision-making tasks and self-report measures.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAmotivation is a common symptom in various mental disorders, including psychotic or depressive disorders. Effort-based decision-making (EBDM)-tasks quantifying amotivation at a behavioral level have been on the rise. Task performance has been shown to differentiate patient groups from healthy controls. However, findings on indicators of construct validity, such as the correlations between different tasks and between tasks and self-reported/observer-rated amotivation in clinical and healthy samples have been inconclusive.
methodsIn a representative community sample (N = 90), we tested the construct validity of the Deck Choice Task, the Expenditure for Rewards Task and the Balloon Task. We calculated correlations between the EBDM-tasks and between the EBDM-tasks and self-reported amotivation, apathy, anticipatory pleasure, and BIS/BAS.
resultsCorrelations between tasks were low to moderate (0.198 ≤ r ≤ 0.358), with the Balloon Task showing the largest correlations with the other tasks, but no significant correlations between any EBDM-task and the self-report measures.
conclusionAlthough different EBDM-tasks are conceptualized to measure the same construct, a large part of what each task measures could not be accounted for by the other tasks. Moreover, the tasks did not appear to substantially capture what was measured in established self-report instruments for amotivation in our sample, which could be interpreted as questioning the construct validity of EBDM-tasks.
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.