Shielding working memory from distraction is more effortful than flexible updating

Exerting cognitive control is known to carry a subjective effort cost and people are generally biased to avoid it. Recent theorizing suggests that the cost of cognitive effort serves as a motivational signal to bias people away from excessive focusing and towards more cognitive flexibility. We asked whether the effort cost of stable distractor resistance is higher than that of non-selective flexible updating of working memory representations. We tested this prediction by using (1) a delayed response paradigm in which we manipulate demands for distractor resistance and flexible updating, as well as (2) a subsequent cognitive effort discounting paradigm that allows us to quantify subjective effort costs. We demonstrate, in two different samples (28 and 62 participants) that participants discount tasks both high in distractor resistance and flexible updating when comparing with taking a break. As predicted, when directly contrasting distractor resistance and non-selective flexible updating the subjective cost of performing a task requiring distractor resistance is higher than that requiring flexible updating.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2025-04-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-96980-x
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.72

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Shielding working memory from distraction is more effortful than flexible updating

Danae Papadopetraki, Andrew Westbrook, Roshan Cools, Bram B. Zandbelt et al.
4 citations
Scientific Reports
Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
5.72
article

Shielding working memory from distraction is more effortful than flexible updating

Danae Papadopetraki, Andrew Westbrook, Roshan Cools, Bram B. Zandbelt, Monja I. Froböse
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Exerting cognitive control is known to carry a subjective effort cost and people are generally biased to avoid it. Recent theorizing suggests that the cost of cognitive effort serves as a motivational signal to bias people away from excessive focusing and towards more cognitive flexibility. We asked whether the effort cost of stable distractor resistance is higher than that of non-selective flexible updating of working memory representations. We tested this prediction by using (1) a delayed response paradigm in which we manipulate demands for distractor resistance and flexible updating, as well as (2) a subsequent cognitive effort discounting paradigm that allows us to quantify subjective effort costs. We demonstrate, in two different samples (28 and 62 participants) that participants discount tasks both high in distractor resistance and flexible updating when comparing with taking a break. As predicted, when directly contrasting distractor resistance and non-selective flexible updating the subjective cost of performing a task requiring distractor resistance is higher than that requiring flexible updating.

Scientific ReportsVol. 15(1)
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US), Radboud University Nijmegen (NL), Radboud University Medical Center (NL), Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf (DE)
Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
5.72
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Shielding working memory from distraction is more effortful than flexible updating — Danae Papadopetraki, Andrew Westbrook, et al. · Scientific Reports (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS