scholarly journals When Choosing is Painful: A Psychological Opportunity Cost Model

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabillon Emmanuelle
Keyword(s):  
Opportunity Cost ◽  
Cost Model

Formal models of “resource depletion”

2013 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 694-695 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hilde M. Huizenga ◽  
Maurits W. van der Molen ◽  
Anika Bexkens ◽  
Wery P. M. van den Wildenberg
Keyword(s):  
Executive Function ◽  
Executive Functions ◽  
Opportunity Cost ◽  
Alternative Model ◽  
Cost Model ◽  
Resource Depletion ◽  
Formal Models

AbstractThe opportunity cost model (OCM) aims to explain various phenomena, among which the finding that performance degrades if executive functions are used repeatedly (“resource depletion”). We argue that an OCM account of resource depletion requires two unlikely assumptions, and we discuss an alternative that does not require these assumptions. This alternative model describes the interplay between executive function and motivation.

The effect of opportunity costs on mental fatigue in labor/leisure tradeoffs

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonas Dora ◽  
Madelon van Hooff ◽  
Sabine A. E. Geurts ◽  
Michiel A. J. Kompier ◽  
Erik Bijleveld
Keyword(s):  
Opportunity Cost ◽  
Cost Model ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Daily Basis ◽  
Mental Fatigue ◽  
Current Level ◽  
Opportunity Costs ◽  
Total N ◽  
Paid Labor ◽  
Current Task

Most people experience the feeling of mental fatigue on a daily basis. Previous research shows that mental fatigue impacts information processing and decision making. However, the proximal causes of mental fatigue are not yet well understood. In this research, we test the opportunity cost model of mental fatigue, which proposes that people become more fatigued when the next-best alternative to the current task is higher in value. In three preregistered experiments (total N = 300), participants repeatedly reported their current level of fatigue and chose to perform a paid labor task vs an unpaid leisure task. In Study 1, all participants were offered the same labor/leisure choice. In Studies 2 and 3, we manipulated the opportunity costs of a labor task through the value of an alternative leisure task. In all studies, we found that people were more likely to choose for leisure as they became more fatigued. We did not find that the manipulated leisure value influenced the amount of fatigue participants experienced nor the likelihood to choose for leisure. However, in exploratory analyses, we found (and replicated) that participants who reported to value the leisure task more got more fatigued during labor and less fatigued during leisure. Collectively, these results provide cautious support for the opportunity cost model, but they also show that cost-benefit analyses relating to labor and leisure tasks are fleeting.

Reducing Food Losses: A (Dis)-Opportunity Cost Model

2015 ◽  
pp. 151-166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesco Contò ◽  
Mariantonietta Fiore ◽  
Giustina Pellegrini
Keyword(s):  
Opportunity Cost ◽  
Cost Model ◽  
Food Losses

Cost-benefit models as the next, best option for understanding subjective effort

2013 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 707-726 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Kurzban ◽  
Angela Duckworth ◽  
Joseph W. Kable ◽  
Justus Myers
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Opportunity Cost ◽  
Cost Model ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Basic Structure ◽  
Target Article

AbstractThe commentaries on our target article are surprisingly sympathetic to our overall approach to explaining subjective effort, though disagreement with particulars inevitably emerged. Here, in our response, we first review the few disagreements concerning the basic structure of our proposal, highlighting areas in which little or no resistance was voiced. Opposition to the assumptions that underlie our opportunity cost model is noticeably limited. Areas of genuine disagreement, however, include: (1) the inputs to and outputs of the relevant decision-making systems; (2) how to interpret data regarding individual differences in performance; (3) how to explain persistence on tasks that give rise to the sensation of subjective effort; and (4) the details of the relevant neuropsychological systems. Throughout we point to empirical issues raised by the commentaries and suggest research that will be useful in arbitrating points of disagreement.

Maximising utility does not promote survival

2013 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 685-685
Author(s):  
Daniel B. Cohen ◽  
Lauren L. Saling
Keyword(s):  
Opportunity Cost ◽  
Cost Model ◽  
Opportunity Costs ◽  
Over Time

AbstractWe argue that maximising utility does not promote survival. Hence, there is no reason to expect people to modulate effort according to a task's opportunity costs. There is also no reason why our evaluation of the marginal opportunity costs of tasks should predictably rise with repetition. Thus, the opportunity cost model cannot explain why tasks typically become harder over time.

Beyond dopamine: The noradrenergic system and mental effort

2013 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 698-699 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas J. Malecek ◽  
Russell A. Poldrack
Keyword(s):  
Control Systems ◽  
Opportunity Cost ◽  
Cost Model ◽  
Neural Model ◽  
Mental Effort ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Noradrenergic System ◽  
Reciprocal Connections ◽  
Flexible Integration

AbstractAn opportunity cost model of effort requires flexible integration of valuation and self-control systems. Reciprocal connections between these networks and brainstem neuromodulatory systems are likely to provide the signals that affect subsequent persistence or failure when faced with effort challenges. The interaction of these systems should be taken into account to strengthen a normative neural model of effort.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document