Hause Lin

Midfrontal theta and pupil dilation parametrically track subjective conflict (but also surprise) during intertemporal choice

&NA; Many everyday choices are based on personal, subjective preferences. When choosing between two options, we often feel conflicted, especially when trading off costs and benefits occurring at different times (e.g., saving for later versus spending now). Although previous work has investigated the neurophysiological basis of conflict during inhibitory control tasks, less is known about subjective conflict resulting from competing subjective preferences. In this pre‐registered study, we investigated subjective conflict during intertemporal choice, whereby participants chose between smaller immediate versus larger delayed rewards (e.g.,

Development of a Within-Subject, Repeated-Measures Ego-Depletion Paradigm

15 today vs.

Ego depletion pre-registered study

22 in 30 days). We used economic modeling to parametrically vary eleven different levels of conflict, and recorded EEG data and pupil dilation. Midfrontal theta power, derived from EEG, correlated with pupil responses, and our results suggest that these signals track different gradations of subjective conflict. Unexpectedly, both signals were also maximally enhanced when decisions were surprisingly easy. Therefore, these signals may track events requiring increased attention and adaptive shifts in behavioral responses, with subjective conflict being only one type of such event. Our results suggest that the neural systems underlying midfrontal theta and pupil responses interact when weighing costs and benefits during intertemporal choice. Thus, understanding these interactions might elucidate how individuals resolve self‐control conflicts. HighlightsModeled conflict during intertemporal choice and measured EEG and pupil responses.Midfrontal theta and pupil responses parametrically tracked subjective conflict.But theta and pupil responses were also large when decisions were surprisingly easy.These signals may implement adaptive control during value‐guided choice.

Study 4: Stroop as DV

Ego depletion is under scrutiny for low replicability, possibly reflecting the limited statistical power available in between-subject designs. In response, we created a within-subject, repeated-measures ego-depletion paradigm that repeatedly alternated depletion and recovery manipulations. Each manipulation was followed by measuring subjective fatigue, mood, and self-control performance. Across 12 studies (N = 754), participants reliably reported having lower energy and mood after depleting manipulations compared to after recovery manipulations. Depletion manipulations did not consistently affect behavioral self-control, although the depletion effect was meta-analytically significant (d = .045). Furthermore, unintended fatigue and practice effects occurred over the course of the paradigm, systematically interfering with the intended depletion effects. We recommend that depletion research takes advantage of within-subject designs across multiple sessions to avoid spillover effects between measurements.