ArticlePsychological review2026
Control adjustment costs limit goal flexibility: Empirical evidence and a computational account.
Article in Psychological review, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The puzzle of profitless pre-cues.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Pooled it
- Cognitive flexibility versus stability via activation-based and weight-based adaptations.Communications psychology · 2026Article
- Is Prospective Memory Monitoring Governed by Dual Processes of Initiating a Retrieval Mode and Checking for Targets? A Conceptual Replication and Extension of Guynn (2003).Journal of cognition · 2026Article
- Modeling of control over task switching and cross-task interference supports a two-dimensional model of cognitive stability and flexibility.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Review
- How cortico-basal ganglia-thalamic subnetworks can shift decision policies to increase reward rate.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Slower transitions between control states lead to reductions in cognitive flexibility over the lifespan.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- The temporal dynamics of metacognitive experiences track rational adaptations in task performance.Communications psychology · 2025Article
- Negative affect-driven impulsivity as hierarchical model-based overgeneralization.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2025Review
- The Cost of Regulating Effort: Reward and Difficulty Cues With Longer Prediction Horizons Have a Stronger Impact on Performance.Journal of cognition · 2025Article
- Make or Break: The Influence of Expected Challenges and Rewards on the Motivation and Experience Associated with Cognitive Effort Exertion.Journal of cognitive neuroscience · 2024Article
- Make or break: The influence of expected challenges and rewards on the motivation and experience associated with cognitive effort exertion.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A cornerstone of human intelligence is the ability to flexibly adjust our cognition and behavior as our goals change. For instance, achieving some goals requires efficiency, while others require caution. Different goals require us to engage different control processes, such as adjusting how attentive and cautious we are. Here, we show that performance incurs control adjustment costs when people adjust control to meet changing goals. Across four experiments, we provide evidence of these costs and validate a dynamical systems model explaining the source of these costs. Participants performed a single cognitively demanding task under varying performance goals (e.g., being fast or accurate). We modeled control allocation to include a dynamic process of adjusting from one's current control state to a target state for a given performance goal. By incorporating inertia into this adjustment process, our model accounts for our empirical finding that people undershoot their target control state more (i.e., exhibit larger adjustment costs) when goals switch rather than remain fixed (Study 1). Further validating our model, we show that the magnitude of this cost is increased when: distances between target states are larger (Study 2), there is less time to adjust to the new goal (Study 3), and goal switches are more frequent (Study 4). Our findings characterize the costs of adjusting control to meet changing goals and show that these costs emerge directly from cognitive control dynamics. In so doing, they shed new light on the sources of and constraints on flexibility of goal-directed behavior. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
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.