Yeo, G. & Neal, A. (2008). Subjective Cognitive Effort: A model of States, Traits, and Time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93 (3), 617-631.
Choice of Study
Effort plays a key role in motivational theory. Motivation theories treat effort as a construct that changes within individuals in response to individual and environmental factors (Bandura, 1986; Kanfer, Ackerman, & Heggestad, 1996; Locke, 1968; Vroom, 1964). Yeo & Neal felt that previous studies have treated effort as static rather than dynamic (Fried & Slowik, 2004) and studies had not examined the factors that produce changes in effort within individuals over time. There is a need to study processes at the intra-individual level (Cervone, 204; C. Fisher, 2002; Mischel & Shoda, 1998; Vancouver, 2005).
Problem
Yeo and Neal examined intra-individual differences in subjective cognitive effort (the idea of "trying hard") as a function of practice on a task, and how perceptions of difficulty of the task may affect effort. They also examined whether or not differences of practice and perceptions of task difficulty among individuals were due to differences in cognitive ability and conscientiousness.
Methods
Undergraduate students were given an Air Traffic Control simulation as a task. They were to ensure that all aircraft remain separated by at least 5 kilometers and needed to do so by controlling the speed of the aircraft. Each trial had eight aircraft on the screen at any given time and there were fourteen 5-minute trials.
The task froze five times and participants were asked questions on an 11-point scale such as "How difficult did you find the task just before the screen froze?"
Yeo and NeaL measured cognitive ability (Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices), conscientiousness (Revised NEO Personality Inventory), as well as task performance and practice variables.
Analyses were conducted using hierarchical multivariate linear models (Bryk & Raudenbush, 1992).
Results
There was a negative correlation between ability and conscientiousness which is consistent with previous findings (Moutafi, Furnham, & Paltiel, 2004). Performance also improved over time showing a classic learning curve as the participants became more skilled at the task. The amount of cognitive effort that participants reported applying to the task declined over time. An increase in perceived difficulty at the intra-individual level was associated with an increase in subjective cognitive effort.
Discussion
The amount of cognitive effort that individuals reported expending decreased as they became more experienced at the task and increased when their perceptions of difficulty increased. These patterns were moderated by cognitive ability and conscientiousness. Individuals with low conscientiousness reported reducing the amount of cognitive effort that they applied to the task at a faster rate than did participants with high conscientiousness. Individuals with low cognitive ability and high conscientiousness responded more strongly to changes in perceived difficulty than did students with high cognitive ability and low conscientiousness. Finally, the finding that subjective cognitive effort (trying) predicted performance supported Yeo's and Neal's claims of the validity of the self-report measure they used.
Conclusion
Different people reacted differently to perceptions of difficulty. Individuals with low cognitive ability or low conscientiousness reacted more strongly to perceptions of task difficulty than did others. The authors believe that these reactions were due to differences in resource capacity. Low ability individuals need to react more strongly to changes in difficulty relative to their counterparts because they have fewer resources available. The results suggest that cognitive ability can influence the way individuals respond to feedback during task engagement. Yeo and Neal believe the interaction between conscientiousness and perceived difficulty reflects the tendency of highly conscientiousness individuals to work consistently hard - they appear to persist with high levels of of cognitive effort regardless of task difficulty. By comparison, those with low conscientiousness appear to reserve high levels of cognitive effort for when the task is perceived to be particularly difficult. The results suggest that stable behavioral tendencies associated with conscientiousness can influence the way individuals respond to feedback during task engagement.
The study demonstrated two findings. The first relates to the way that subjective cognitive effort changes as individuals become more skilled at a task. An individual's level of conscientiousness influenced the rate at which cognitive effort declined throughout skill acquisition. The second finding relates to the way that individuals react to perceptions of task difficulty. The intra-individual relationship between perceived difficulty and subjective cognitive effort strengthened throughout skill acquisition. Cognitive ability and conscientiousness can influence the degree to which individuals react to perceptions of task difficulty.
4 comments:
Hi Stephen, I was interested to read that subjective cognitive effort changes as individuals become more skilled at a task. I was reminded of my advanced students and how it really does seem as though they put in little cognitive effort because they have competence and feel skilled. Do you think that this lack of cognitive effort can backfire and become a negative trait for the learner?
Navdeep, isn't what you're describing more of an issue of prior knowledge?
Hi Amy, I guess it is an issue of prior knowledge:)
Navdeep-
Absolutely, students can put in little effort because of their skill level is way beyond the task. I think it is called boredom (really outside the flow!) It is possible that the reduced effort becomes habitual - look at all of the 'underachievers' in school. But it isn't only because of high skills versus low challenge. As we all know, there are many other factors at play, too.
Post a Comment