Search

Despite people's general desire to avoid cognitive effort, there is a limit to our parsimony: boredom, a state defined by a lack of successful mental engagement, is found to be similarly aversive. The work presented here investigates how context – the alternative tasks present and the environmental context – impacts people's aversion to exerting cognitive effort and avoiding boredom via a demand-selection task. In a population of undergraduate students, we assessed how people's willingness to exert mental effort (in a working memory task) is affected by the presence of an easier alternative (less cognitively demanding) or a boring alternative (doing nothing at all). To manipulate environmental context, we conducted the experiment online, where participants completed the task remotely, and in a controlled laboratory setting. We find people willingly seek out effortful tasks to avoid boredom, despite avoiding high demands when both tasks on offer required some effort. We also find large effects of the participants' environmental context, with preferences for the most demanding task increasing by over 150% in the lab compared to online. These results bear relevance to theories that argue the costs of effort are determined relative to the alternatives available (e.g., opportunity cost theories). Moreover, the results demonstrate that researchers who deliberately (or inadvertently) manipulate effort and boredom must consider the effects context (both choice and environmental) may have on people's behaviour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Investigations of information-seeking often highlight people's tendency to forgo financial reward in return for advance information about future outcomes. Most of these experiments use tasks in which reward contingencies are described to participants. The use of such descriptions leaves open the question of whether the opportunity to obtain such noninstrumental information influences people's ability to learn and represent the underlying reward structure of an experimental environment. In two experiments, participants completed a two-armed bandit task with monetary incentives where reward contingencies were learned via trial-by-trial experience. We find, akin to description-based tasks, that participants are willing to forgo financial reward to receive information about a delayed, unchangeable outcome. Crucially, however, there is little evidence this willingness to pay for information is driven by an inaccurate representation of the reward structure: participants' representations approximated the underlying reward structure regardless of the presence of advance noninstrumental information. The results extend previous conclusions regarding the intrinsic value of information to an experience-based domain and highlight challenges of probing participants' memories for experienced rewards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Factors affecting information-seeking behaviour can be task-endogenous (e.g., probability of winning a gamble), or task-exogenous (e.g., personality trait measures). Various task-endogenous factors affecting non-instrumental information-seeking behaviour have been identified, but it is unclear how task-exogenous factors affect such behaviour, and if they interact with task-endogenous factors. In an online information seeking experiment (N = 279), we focus on the role that outcome probability, as a task-endogenous factor, has on information preferences. We find reliable preference for advance information on highly probable gains and low preference for highly probable losses. Comparisons with individual trait measures of information preference (e.g., intolerance of uncertainty scale, obsessive-compulsive inventory, information preferences scale) reveal minimal association between these task-exogenous factors with choice task performance. We also find minimal interaction between outcome probability and individual trait measures. Despite the choice task and trait measures purportedly tapping the same (or similar) construct, the absence of clear relationships ultimately suggests a multi-dimensional nature of information preference. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]