The effects of cognitive load during intertrial intervals on judgements of control: The role of working memory and contextual learning

Abstract

When there is no contingency between actions and outcomes, but outcomes occur frequently, people tend to judge that they have control over those outcomes, a phenomenon known as the outcome density (OD) effect. Recent studies show that the OD effect depends on the duration of the temporal interval between action-outcome conjunctions, with longer intervals inducing stronger effects. However, under some circumstances OD effect is reduced, for example when participants are mildly depressed. We reasoned that working memory (WM) plays an important role in learning of context; with reduced WM capacity to process contextual information during intertrial intervals (ITIs) during contingency learning might lead to reduced OD effects (limited capacity hypothesis). To test this, we used a novel dual-task procedure that increases the WM load during the ITIs of an operant (e.g., action-outcome) contingency learning task to impact contextual learning. We tested our hypotheses in groups of students with zero (Experiments 1, N=34), and positive contingencies (Experiment 2, N=34). The findings indicated that WM load during the ITIs reduced the OD effects compared to no load conditions (Experiment 1 and 2). In Experiment 2, we observed reduced OD effects on action judgements under high load in zero and positive contingencies. However, the participants' judgements were still sensitive to the difference between zero and positive contingencies. We discuss the implications of our findings for the effects of depression and context in contingency learning.

Traits for depression related to agentic and external control

“…In this study, scoring higher on a depression inventory was not related to either type of control. Though, we note that contextual factors (Msetfi et al, 2016) and behaviour variation (Blanco et al, 2009; 2011) are known to influence effects mediated by mood and depression, indeed here we demonstrate a differential de-coupling of behaviour and judgements in our two groups(see also , Na, et al, 2019).…”

“…However, our evidence while correlational, suggests that the High BDI participants: a pre-existing context attentional bias produced more responses (Msetfi, et al, 2016); aor a general increased response rate enhanced overall control judgments, (Blanco, et al, 2012), particularly in High BDI participants where they over-integrate information from the context (Msetfi, et al, 2017).…”

“…Another approach is to assume that perceived control is data-driven. Thus, it has been argued that instead of, or perhaps in addition to, pre-existing biases being the main influencer of perceived control ratings, it is the processing of and learning about specific aspects of contingency experience (Blanco, Matute, & Vadillo, 2009;2011;Byrom, Msetfi, & Murphy, 2015;Cavus & Msetfi, 2016;Msetfi, Wade, & Murphy, 2013) or the current motivational state of the participant (e.g., Baker et al, 2011). For example, Matute (1996) has argued that rates of behaviour, affect the degree of control perceived.…”