ArticleBrain sciences2025
The Impact of Immediate and Delayed Rewards on Task-Switching Performance.
Article in Brain sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesSwitching between different tasks incurs switch costs. Previous research has demonstrated that rewards can enhance performance in cognitive tasks. However, prior studies have primarily focused on the overall improvement in cognitive task performance, with limited research on how different types of rewards function under various task conditions. This study aims to investigate the distinct effects of immediate and delayed rewards on cognitive task performance in different task conditions (repeated trials and task-switching trials) and to explore the underlying neural mechanisms, particularly focusing on how rewards influence attention allocation during the concurrent processing of multiple cues.
methodsThis study recruited 27 college students (average age 19 years old, 10 males and 17 females). A cue-based task-switching paradigm incorporating immediate and delayed rewards was employed. The study examined the effects of immediate and delayed rewards on cognitive task performance in repeated trials and task-switching trials. Event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded to investigate the neural mechanisms underlying reward effects on attention allocation.
resultsBehavioral results indicated that immediate rewards significantly enhanced performance in repeated trials compared to delayed rewards. In contrast, no significant difference between immediate and delayed rewards was observed in task-switching trials. ERP results showed that immediate rewards induced a larger P300 amplitude than delayed rewards under the task repetition condition. No P300 difference was found between immediate and delayed rewards under the task-switching condition.
conclusionsThe findings suggest that rewards enhance task performance by optimizing the allocation of attention to the ongoing task when multiple cues are processed concurrently. When additional resources are required to process task-related cues, there may be insufficient remaining capacity to effectively process reward cues, which could be essential for the optimal completion of the task. These results support the Expected Value of Control (EVC) theory in task-switching scenarios.
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.