Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

Core construct of cognitive effort investment.

ξ residuals of the first-order factors set equal, ε error variances of the indicator variables set equal, 1 loadings of the indicator variables fixed to 1.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Expected relation between actual effort investment and (A) demand and (B) payoff as a function of cognitive effort investment.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Schematic illustration of the study procedure.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Schematic trial procedure of the n-back and flanker task.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Table 1.

Main effects of cognitive abilities and crystallized intelligence in n-back and flanker task.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Correlation matrix for perceived task load in the cognitive task battery and flanker task.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Results for perceived task load analysis in n-back task.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Results for reaction time analysis in n-back and flanker task.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Interaction plots of cognitive effort investment × payoff interaction for reaction time in the (A) n-back and (B) flanker task.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Table 5.

Results for accuracy analysis in n-back and flanker task.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

Results for early frontal midline theta power analysis in n-back and flanker task.

More »

Table 6 Expand

Fig 6.

Interaction plot of cognitive effort investment × demand interaction for early frontal midline theta power in the flanker task.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Table 7.

Results for late frontal midline theta power analysis in n-back and flanker task.

More »

Table 7 Expand

Fig 7.

Mean ERPs at Fz, FCz, and Cz by conditions demand and payoff for the n-back and flanker task.

Vertical solid lines indicate stimulus onset. Vertical dashed lines indicate flanker onset in the flanker task. The gray area marks the time window of 310 ± 20 ms from target onset. The plots presented rely on raw data and should not be interpreted in terms of main effects, but rather serve to assess the quality of the EEG signal.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Table 8.

Results for N2 amplitude analysis in n-back and flanker task.

More »

Table 8 Expand

Fig 8.

Mean at ERPs Cz, CPz, and Pz by conditions demand and payoff for the n-back and flanker task.

Vertical solid lines indicate stimulus onset. Vertical dashed lines indicate flanker onset in the flanker task. The gray area marks the time window 400 ± 20 ms from target onset. The plots presented rely on raw data and should not be interpreted in terms of main effects, but rather serve to assess the quality of the EEG signal.

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Table 9.

Results for P3 amplitude analysis in n-back and flanker task.

More »

Table 9 Expand

Fig 9.

Interaction plot of cognitive effort investment × payoff interaction for P3 amplitude in the n-back task.

More »

Fig 9 Expand

Fig 10.

Mean pupil size by conditions demand and payoff for the n-back and flanker task.

Vertical solid lines indicate stimulus onset. Vertical dashed lines indicate flanker onset in the flanker task.

More »

Fig 10 Expand

Table 10.

Results for pupil dilation analysis in n-back and flanker task.

More »

Table 10 Expand