Abstract:It is well known that people will exert effort on a task if sufficiently motivated, but how they distribute these efforts across different strategies (e.g., efficiency vs. caution) remains uncertain. Past work has shown that people invest effort differently for potential positive outcomes (rewards) versus potential negative outcomes (penalties). However, this research failed to account for differences in the context in which negative outcomes motivate someone - either as punishment or reinforcement. It is therefore unclear whether effort profiles differ as a function of outcome valence, motivational context, or both. Using computational modeling and our novel Multi-Incentive Control Task, we show that the influence of aversive outcomes on one's effort profile is entirely determined by their motivational context. Participants (N:91) favored increased caution in response to larger penalties for incorrect responses, and favored increased efficiency in response to larger reinforcement for correct responses, whether positively or negatively incentivized. STATEMENT OF RELEVANCE: People have to constantly decide how to allocate their mental effort, and in doing so can be motivated by both the positive outcomes that effort accrues and the negative outcomes that effort avoids. For example, someone might persist on a project for work in the hopes of being promoted or to avoid being reprimanded or even fired. Understanding how people weigh these different types of incentives is critical for understanding variability in human achievement as well as sources of motivational impairments (e.g., in major depression). We show that people not only consider both potential positive and negative outcomes when allocating mental effort, but that the profile of effort they engage under negative incentives differs depending on whether that outcome is contingent on sustaining good performance (negative reinforcement) or avoiding bad performance (punishment). Clarifying the motivational factors that determine effort exertion is an important step for understanding motivational impairments in psychopathology.

Asymmetrical attributions for approach versus avoidance behavior

Asymmetrical effects of reward and punishment on attributions of morality

Money, Moral Transgressions, and Blame

The Effects of Power,Social Motive,and Accountability on the Negotiation Cognition,Behavior,and Outcomes

The Avowal of Responsibility for Good and Bad Outcomes

A cognitive (attribution)-emotion-action model of motivated behavior: An analysis of judgments of help-giving.

Predicting responsibility judgments from dispositional inferences and causal attributions

Effects of Task Structure and Attribution Target on Responsibility Attributions in Human–robot Interaction

The role of causal attributions in determining behavioral consequences: A meta-analysis from an intrapersonal attributional perspective in achievement contexts.

The importance of epistemic intentions in ascription of responsibility

Actual and counterfactual effort contribute to responsibility attributions in collaborative tasks

The Catch-22 of Forgetfulness: Responsibility for Mental Mistakes

The Fundamental Attribution Error in Human-Robot Interaction: An Experimental Investigation on Attributing Responsibility to a Social Robot for Its Pre-Programmed Behavior

Ready to help, no matter what you did: Responsibility attribution does not influence compassion in expert Buddhist practitioners.

Linkages Between Causal Ascriptions, Emotion, and Behaviour

Mark his motives: A motivational attribution perspective on observer responses to peer helping behaviors

When company decisions harm or help the environment: the influence of social context and affective state on moral and causal responsibility attributions

Motivational context determines the impact of aversive outcomes on mental effort allocation

Understanding Teachers' Attributions and Responses to Student Misbehavior: The Roles of Explanatory Rationale and Personal Beliefs

After Exoneration: Attributions of Responsibility Impact Perceptions

Attributional style in aggressive adolescent boys