To better understand the effects of reward/motivation on gradCPT in the current study relative to other rewarded and unrewarded versions of the gradCPT, we compared the results of this study to [18], which conducted a series of rewarded and unrewarded experiments using similar tasks. In this previous study, participants were assigned to one of four conditions as follows: 1) no reward condition 2) time reward, in which participants were told that the length of the task would be directly related to their performance 3) a performance-based monetary reward condition similar to the continuous-small-loss condition in the current study and 4) performance-based monetary reward condition where feedback on the amount accumulated was presented periodically. The results from this study showed that when participants were rewarded (conditions 2–4), their overall performance (d’ and RT variability) was significantly more accurate and less variable than those in the no-reward condition (condition 1). However, participants in all four conditions still showed significant and statistically indistinguishable vigilance decrements in d’ and CV. Thus, these prior experiments serve as a comparison to both replicate the effect in our continuous-small-loss condition, and contrast several other types of incremental reward (and no reward) with the more novel anticipate-large-loss condition.
Do you have any questions about this protocol?
Post your question to gather feedback from the community. We will also invite the authors of this article to respond.