Examining the reliability and validity of two versions of the Effort-Expenditure for Rewards Task (EEfRT)

Abstract

The Effort-Expenditure for Rewards Task (EEfRT) has gained validity evidence from several studies. However, various modifications have been applied to the original version, which have never been compared systematically. In Study 1, we tested 120 healthy participants to directly compare two versions of the EEfRT. In Study 2, we tested a larger sample of 394 healthy participants to further examine the original EEfRT. We replicated the split-half reliability of both task versions. However, self-reported personality traits (e.g., trait BAS) correlated with only some task performance parameters in Study 1, which did not replicate for the original EEfRT in Study 2. Our results indicate complex and sometimes inconsistent relations between different personality traits, task properties, and reward attributes.

Individual differences in contingencies between situation characteristics and personality states.

“…As such, our measure of personality traits as average tendencies represents only one method to assess this construct. Previous work indicates only moderate agreement between various different data sources to assess traits: r = .20 between indirect and self-reported trait measures (De Cuyper et al, 2017), mean uncorrected r = .35 between self-reported and other-reported trait measures (Connelly & Ones, 2010), r = .36 between self-reported trait measures and aggregated personality states (Horstmann & Rauthmann, 2022), frequently absent correlations between self-reported traits and behavioral task measures (e.g., Dang et al, 2020; Ohmann et al, 2022; Wennerhold & Friese, 2020), and frequently absent or small correlations between self-reported traits and physiological measures proposed to be related to or even underlie certain traits (e.g., Kuper et al, 2019; Stemmler & Wacker, 2010; Sundin et al, 2021). While these findings could be partly attributable to suboptimal psychometric properties (e.g., low reliability or construct validity) of some of the measures involved, they suggest that other data sources measure aspects of personality traits that are nonoverlapping with self-reports.…”

Individual Differences in Contingencies Between Situation Characteristics and Personality States

“…As such, our measure of personality traits as average tendencies represents only one method to assess this construct. Previous work indicates only moderate agreement between various different data sources to assess traits: r = .20 between indirect and self-reported trait measures (De Cuyper et al, 2017), mean uncorrected r = .35 between self-reported and otherreported trait measures (Connelly & Ones, 2010), r = .36 between self-reported trait measures and aggregated personality states (Horstmann & Rauthmann, 2022), frequently absent correlations between self-reported traits and behavioral task measures (e.g., Dang et al, 2020;Ohmann et al, 2022;Wennerhold & Friese, 2020), and frequently absent or small correlations between self-reported traits and physiological measures proposed to be related to or even underlie certain traits (e.g., Kuper et al, 2019;Stemmler & Wacker, 2010;Sundin et al, 2021). While these findings could be partly attributable to suboptimal psychometric properties (e.g., low reliability or construct validity) of some of the measures involved, they suggest that other data sources measure aspects of personality traits that are non-overlapping with self-reports.…”

Novel genome‐wide associations for effort valuation and psychopathology in children and adults

“…The EEfRT was developed by Treadway and colleagues to measure effort-based decision-making (Treadway et al, 2009) and is currently the recommended paradigm for the study of "effort" under the RDoC framework (National Institute of Mental Health, 2018). A recent study examining the reliability and validity of the EEfRT cites multiple studies in which correlations between EEfRT outcomes and rewardrelated psychopathology such as depression, autism, and SCZ concord with trends observed elsewhere in the literature (Ohmann et al, 2022). The EEfRT consists of a multi-trial game in which participants attempt to maximize their monetary rewards.…”