Cognitive conflict does not always mean high effort: Task difficulty's moderating effect on cardiac response.

This article presents an experiment (N = 127 university students) testing whether the previously found impact of conflict primes on effort-related cardiac response is moderated by objective task difficulty. Recently, it has been shown that primed cognitive conflict increases cardiac pre-ejection period (PEP) reactivity-an index of effort intensity-during the performance of relatively easy tasks. This effect could be attributed to conflict-related negative affect. Consequently, as it has been shown for other types of negative affect, we expected conflict primes' effect to be task-context dependent and thus to be moderated by objective task difficulty. In a between-persons design, we manipulated conflict via embedded pictures of conflict-related vs. non-conflict-related Stroop items in a memory task. We expected primed conflict to increase effort in a relatively easy version of the task but to lead to disengagement when task difficulty was objectively high. PEP reactivity corroborated our predictions. Rather than always increasing effort, cognitive conflict's effect on resource mobilization was context-dependent and resulted in weak responses in a difficult task.

Action-orientation shields against primed cognitive conflict effects on effort-related cardiac response.

This article presents a quasi-experiment (N = 79 university students) testing whether individual differences in action-state orientation moderate primed cognitive conflict's effects on sympathetically mediated cardiac response during task performance reflecting effort. Action control theory posits that action-oriented individuals are less receptive to distracting affective stimuli during goal pursuit than state-oriented individuals because action-orientation is related to higher volitional skills. Therefore, we expected that action-oriented individuals should be shielded against conflict primes' effect on effort-related responses in the cardiovascular system. By contrast, state-oriented individuals should be more sensitive to irrelevant negative affective stimulation and therefore mobilize higher resources under such conditions. Responses of the cardiac pre-ejection period (PEP) during a moderately difficult short-term memory task corroborated these predictions. The present findings provide the first evidence that individual differences in action-state orientation indeed moderate previously demonstrated cognitive conflict priming effects on effort-related cardiac response and extend recent findings on action shielding.

Individual differences in action-state orientation moderate task difficulty effects on effort-related cardiac response.

A quasi experiment (N = 100 university students) tested whether individual differences in action-state orientation moderate task difficulty effects on resource mobilization assessed as cardiovascular response. According to action control theory, action-oriented individuals have higher self-regulation capacities in demanding situations than state-oriented persons. Action-orientated individuals should also self-generate positive affect in face of obstacles. Therefore, drawing on Wright's (1998) ability extension of motivational intensity theory and research on affective influences on effort-related cardiovascular response, we expected that action-orientation should lead to stronger effort-related cardiovascular responses in a difficult task, while state-orientation should do so in an easy task. Reactivity of cardiac pre-ejection period (PEP) during performance on a short-term memory task corroborated this hypothesis. The present findings provide the first evidence of a link between action-state orientation and effort-related responses in the cardiovascular system.

Is cognitive conflict really effortful? Conflict priming and shielding effects on cardiac response.

Two experiments with N = 221 university students investigated the impact of primed cognitive conflict on effort assessed as cardiac response in tasks that were not conflict-related themselves. Manifest cognitive conflict in cognitive control tasks is confounded with objective response difficulty (e.g., in incongruent Stroop task trials). This makes conclusions about the effortfulness of cognitive conflict itself difficult. We bypassed this problem by administrating pictures of congruent versus incongruent Stroop task stimuli as conflict primes. As predicted, primed cognitive conflict increased cardiac pre-ejection period (PEP) responses in an easy attention task in Experiment 1. Accordingly, cognitive conflict itself is indeed effortful. This effect was replicated in an easy short-term memory task in Experiment 2. Moreover, as further predicted, the primed cognitive conflict effect on PEP reactivity disappeared when participants could personally choose task characteristics. This latter effect corresponds to other recent evidence showing that personal action choice shields against incidental affective influences on action execution and especially on effort-related cardiovascular response.