Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-hzqq2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-28T16:37:31.898Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Monotonous tasks require self-control because they interfere with endogenous reward

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 December 2013

George Ainslie
George Ainslie*
Affiliation:
School of Economics, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch 7701, South Africa; and U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Coatesville, PA 19320. George.Ainslie@va.gov www.picoeconomics.org
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Self-control is a necessary component of subjective effort, but it depends only on farsighted motivation, with no additional, depletable resource. The aversiveness of boring tasks probably comes from their interference with endogenous reward, a new and potentially controversial concept. The self-control needed to stick with any kind of aversive experience increases as the values of the competing motives draw closer together.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 36 , Issue 6 , December 2013 , pp. 679 - 680
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ainslie, G. (2012) Pure hyperbolic discount curves predict “eyes open” self-control. Theory and Decision 73:3–34. doi:10.1007/s11238-011-9272-5.Google Scholar
Ainslie, G. (2013) Grasping the impalpable: The role of endogenous reward in choices, including process addictions. Inquiry 56(5):446–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brehm, J. W. & Cohen, A. R. (1962) Explorations in cognitive dissonance. John Wiley.Google Scholar
Converse, P. D. & DeShon, R. P. (2009) A tale of two tasks: Reversing the self-regulatory resource depletion effect. Journal of Applied Psychology 94(5):1318–24.Google Scholar
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990) Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Dar, R., Stronguin, F., Marouani, R., Krupsky, M. & Frenk, H. (2005) Craving to smoke in orthodox Jewish smokers who abstain on the Sabbath: A comparison to a baseline and a forced abstinence workday. Psychopharmacology 183:294–99.Google Scholar
Daw, N. D. & Doya, K. (2006) The computational neurobiology of learning and reward. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 16:199–204.Google Scholar
Dollard, J. & Miller, N. E. (1950) Personality and psychotherapy: An analysis in terms of learning, thinking, and culture. McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Fudenberg, D. & Levine, D. (2006) A dual-self model of impulse control. American Economic Review 96:1449–76.Google Scholar
Gul, F. & Pesendorfer, W. (2004) Self-control, revealed preference and consumption choice. Review of Economic Dynamics 7:243–64.Google Scholar
Mackworth, N. H. (1948) The breakdown of vigilance during prolonged visual search. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 1:6–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
March, J. G. (1978) Bounded rationality, ambiguity, and the engineering of choice. Bell Journal of Economics 9:587–610.Google Scholar
Spreng, R. N., Mar, R. A. & Kim, A. S. N. (2009) A common neural basis of autobiographical memory, prospection, navigation, theory of mind, and the default mode: A quantitative meta-analysis. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 21(3):489–510.Google Scholar
Zubeck, J. P. (1973) Behavioral and physiological effects of prolonged sensory and perceptual deprivation: A review. In: Man in isolation and confinement, ed. Rasmussen, J., pp. 9–83. Aldine.Google Scholar