Automaticity and cognitive control: Effects of cognitive load on cue-controlled reward choice

Seabrooke, Tina, Wills, Andy J., Hogarth, Lee and Mitchell, Chris J. (2019) Automaticity and cognitive control: Effects of cognitive load on cue-controlled reward choice. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72 (6), 1507-1521. (doi:10.1177/1747021818797052).

Abstract

The extent to which human outcome–response (O-R) priming effects are automatic or under cognitive control is currently unclear. Two experiments tested the effect of cognitive load on O-R priming to shed further light on the debate. In Experiment 1, two instrumental responses earned beer and chocolate points in an instrumental training phase. Instrumental response choice was then tested in the presence of beer, chocolate, and neutral stimuli. On test, a Reversal instruction group was told that the stimuli signalled which response would not be rewarded. The transfer test was also conducted under either minimal (No Load) or considerable (Load) cognitive load. The Non-Reversal groups showed O-R priming effects, where the reward cues increased the instrumental responses that had previously produced those outcomes, relative to the neutral stimulus. This effect was observed even under cognitive load. The Reversal No Load group demonstrated a reversed effect, where response choice was biased towards the response that was most likely to be rewarded according to the instruction. Most importantly, response choice was at chance in the Reversal Load condition. In Experiment 2, cognitive load abolished the sensitivity to outcome devaluation that was otherwise seen when multiple outcomes and responses were cued on test. Collectively, the results demonstrate that complex O-R priming effects are sensitive to cognitive load, whereas the very simple, standard O-R priming effect is more robust.

This record has no associated files available for download.

Contributors

Author: Tina Seabrooke

Download statistics