Claire M. Zedelius

Boosting or choking - How conscious and unconscious reward processing modulate the active maintenance of goal-relevant information

Two experiments examined similarities and differences in the effects of consciously and unconsciously perceived rewards on the active maintenance of goal-relevant information. Participants could gain high and low monetary rewards for performance on a word span task. The reward value was presented supraliminally (consciously visible) or subliminally at different stages during the task. In Experiment 1, rewards were presented before participants processed the target words. Enhanced performance was found in response to higher rewards, regardless whether they were presented supraliminally or subliminally. In Experiment 2, rewards were presented after participants processed the target words, i.e., during maintenance. Performance increased in response to relatively high rewards when they were presented subliminally, but decreased when they were presented supraliminally. We conclude that both consciously and unconsciously perceived rewards boost resources supporting the maintenance of task-relevant information. Conscious processing of rewards can, however, heavily interfere with an ongoing maintenance process and impair performance.

The Middle Way: Finding the Balance between Mindfulness and Mind-Wandering

Abstract Mind-wandering is a common everyday experience in which attention becomes disengaged from the immediate external environment and focused on internal trains of thought. This chapter reviews progress in the study of mind-wandering and its manifold effects on cognition and affect. After summarizing key recent advances in the study of mind-wandering, we focus on three fundamentally practical questions: (1) What are the costs of mind-wandering for cognition and affect? (2) Is it possible to reduce mind-wandering with practices aimed at enhancing mindfulness? (3) What are some possible benefits of mind-wandering that may help to mitigate its costs? This chapter leads to the endorsement of a “middle way” approach to mind-wandering: though it may be useful to cultivate practices for overcoming some of mind-wanderings more disruptive consequences, we should not seek to eliminate it entirely, as it can offer some unique benefits when carried out at the appropriate times.

Mind wandering "Ahas" versus mindful reasoning: alternative routes to creative solutions

Based on mixed results linking both mindfulness and its opposing construct mind wandering to enhanced creativity, we predicted that the relationship between mindfulness and creativity might depend on whether creative problems are approached through analytic strategy or through “insight” (i.e., sudden awareness of a solution). Study 1 investigated the relationship between trait mindfulness and compound remote associates problem solving as a function of participants’ self-reported approach to each problem. The results revealed a negative relationship between mindfulness and problem-solving overall. However, more detailed analysis revealed that mindfulness was associated with impaired problem solving when approaching problems with insight, but increased problem solving when using analysis. In Study 2, we manipulated participants’ problem-solving approach through instructions. We again found a negative relationship between mindfulness and creative performance in general, however, more mindful participants again performed better when instructed to approach problems analytically.

A new perspective on human reward research: How consciously and unconsciously perceived reward information influences performance

The question of how human performance can be improved through rewards is a recurrent topic of interest in psychology and neuroscience. Traditional, cognitive approaches to this topic have focused solely on consciously communicated rewards. Recently, a largely neuroscience-inspired perspective has emerged to examine the potential role of conscious awareness of reward information in effective reward pursuit. The present article reviews research employing a newly developed monetary-reward-priming paradigm that allows for a systematic investigation of this perspective. We analyze this research to identify similarities and differences in how consciously and unconsciously perceived rewards impact three distinct aspects relevant to performance: decision making, task preparation, and task execution. We further discuss whether conscious awareness, in modulating the effects of reward information, plays a role similar to its role in modulating the effects of other affective information. Implications of these insights for understanding the role of consciousness in modulating goal-directed behavior more generally are discussed.

Promising High Monetary Rewards for Future Task Performance Increases Intermediate Task Performance

In everyday life contexts and work settings, monetary rewards are often contingent on future performance. Based on research showing that the anticipation of rewards causes improved task performance through enhanced task preparation, the present study tested the hypothesis that the promise of monetary rewards for future performance would not only increase future performance, but also performance on an unrewarded intermediate task. Participants performed an auditory Simon task in which they responded to two consecutive tones. While participants could earn high vs. low monetary rewards for fast responses to every second tone, their responses to the first tone were not rewarded. Moreover, we compared performance under conditions in which reward information could prompt strategic performance adjustments (i.e., when reward information was presented for a relatively long duration) to conditions preventing strategic performance adjustments (i.e., when reward information was presented very briefly). Results showed that high (vs. low) rewards sped up both rewarded and intermediate, unrewarded responses, and the effect was independent of the duration of reward presentation. Moreover, long presentation led to a speed-accuracy trade-off for both rewarded and unrewarded tones, whereas short presentation sped up responses to rewarded and unrewarded tones without this trade-off. These results suggest that high rewards for future performance boost intermediate performance due to enhanced task preparation, and they do so regardless whether people respond to rewards in a strategic or non-strategic manner.

When unconscious rewards boost cognitive task performance inefficiently: the role of consciousness in integrating value and attainability information

Research has shown that high vs. low value rewards improve cognitive task performance independent of whether they are perceived consciously or unconsciously. However, efficient performance in response to high value rewards also depends on whether or not rewards are attainable. This raises the question of whether unconscious reward processing enables people to take into account such attainability information. Building on a theoretical framework according to which conscious reward processing is required to enable higher level cognitive processing, the present research tested the hypothesis that conscious but not unconscious reward processing enables integration of reward value with attainability information. In two behavioral experiments, participants were exposed to mask high and low value coins serving as rewards on a working memory (WM) task. The likelihood for conscious processing was manipulated by presenting the coins relatively briefly (17 ms) or long and clearly visible (300 ms). Crucially, rewards were expected to be attainable or unattainable. Requirements to integrate reward value with attainability information varied across experiments. Results showed that when integration of value and attainability was required (Experiment 1), long reward presentation led to efficient performance, i.e., selectively improved performance for high value attainable rewards. In contrast, in the short presentation condition, performance was increased for high value rewards even when these were unattainable. This difference between the effects of long and short presentation time disappeared when integration of value and attainability information was not required (Experiment 2). Together these findings suggest that unconsciously processed reward information is not integrated with attainability expectancies, causing inefficient effort investment. These findings are discussed in terms of a unique role of consciousness in efficient allocation of effort to cognitive control processes.

Unaware yet reliant on attention: Experience sampling reveals that mind-wandering impedes implicit learning

Although implicit learning has been widely studied, controversy remains regarding its reliance on attentional resources. A central issue in this controversy is the question of how best to manipulate attention. The usual approach of comparing implicit learning in a serial reaction time (SRT) task under single- versus dual-task conditions is known to be problematic, because the secondary task may not only divert attention away from the primary task, but also interfere with the implicit-learning process itself. To address this confound, in the present study we used an experience-sampling instead of a dual-task approach. We assessed lapses of attention (mind-wandering) with experience-sampling thought probes during a standard implicit-learning SRT task. The results revealed a significant negative correlation between mind-wandering and implicit learning. Thus, greater task focus was associated with improved implicit sequence learning. This result suggests that, at least in the context of this SRT task, optimal implicit learning relies on attention.

The Richness of Inner Experience: Relating Styles of Daydreaming to Creative Processes

Psychologists have long hypothesized that daydreaming (i.e., engaging in stimulus-independent, task-unrelated thoughts and images) may facilitate creativity, but evidence for this hypothesis has been mixed. We propose that, to fully understand the relationship between daydreaming and creativity, it is essential to distinguish between different creative processes as well as between alternative styles of daydreaming. A prominent distinction in creativity research is that between analytic problem solving, which involves incremental and largely conscious processes, and insight, which is characterized by the spontaneity with which an idea springs to mind. In this aspect, insight resembles daydreaming. Indeed, recent evidence has linked daydreaming to creative performance. But like creativity, daydreaming is a multifaceted concept. Daydreams vary in style and content, a fact that is receiving little attention in contemporary research. Not all kinds of daydreaming are likely to have the same effects on creativity. We discuss different factors prevalent in people’s daydreaming, such as mood, attentional focus, and intentionality, and consider how these factors may be related to creative processes. We further discuss implications for ways to enhance creativity through deliberate daydreaming practice.

Beware the reward – How conscious processing of rewards impairs active maintenance performance ☆

Recently, we showed that conscious and unconscious rewards affect the active maintenance of goal-relevant information differently. Here, we elaborate on the mechanisms enabling the boosting or disrupting effects of consciously processed high rewards, and discuss a few methodological and theoretical implications that may be worth considering in future research on the role of reward processing in working memory performance.

Stimulating minds to wander

Springing from memory and imagination, mind wandering is a mental state occupying as much as half of our waking life, involving a shift of attention away from the external environment and toward task-unrelated concerns (1). Although mind wandering may play an important role in planning and creativity (2, 3), it is also widely associated with negative mood and degraded performance on measures of vigilance, working memory, fluid intelligence, and reading comprehension (4, 5). The intrinsically subjective and spontaneous nature of mind wandering has made it difficult to investigate with direct experimental manipulations (6). Researchers have used various approaches to do so indirectly, by altering related factors such as mood, motivation, the amount of time spent on a task, or cognitive load (7, 8). However, these factors may influence various cognitive processes besides mind wandering. Moreover, these approaches do not directly implicate underlying neural mechanisms of mind wandering. In contrast, Axelrod et al. (9) demonstrate that mind wandering can be increased by direct experimental manipulation of brain activity using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to the prefrontal cortex (PFC). The article by Axelrod et al. thus marks a new era for research into mind wandering and previews some of the insights that continued methodological advances will likely make possible.