ReviewCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2026
Integrating arousal and valence approaches to advance cognitive effort research.
Review in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Research on cognitive effort has produced a vast scientific literature. In this paper, we propose a roadmap to describe key developments over the past 70 years. We highlight a shift from a research landscape dominated by questioning "What happens when we engage in effort?" to "Why we engage in effort?" The first question generates a research framework that we call the arousal framework, where effort is seen as a state of increased physiological activation. Research within this framework has flourished following the discovery of the ascending reticular activating system and has focused on the role of the locus coeruleus-noradrenargic pathway in modulating the intensity of cognitive control. The second question has been central to research driven by neuroeconomics and advances in neuroimaging and computational neuroscience, leading to what we call the valence framework. In this perspective, it is assumed that effort is inherently aversive, and that individuals engage in effort only if the benefits outweigh the costs. Within this framework, research seeks the neural correlates of expected value of cognitive control, with a spotlight on basal ganglia-prefrontal dopaminergic pathways. We describe exemplar work pertaining to each framework, highlighting their key epistemological features. We argue that future research on cognitive effort should aim to understand the complementarity and interactive nature of valence and arousal, integrating the two questions of "what happens" and "why." We also argue that understanding effort requires looking more specifically into how individuals execute cognitively demanding tasks, i.e., which solution strategies they adopt.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41618032What 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.