@article{ReisPfisterFoerster2023, author = {Reis, Moritz and Pfister, Roland and Foerster, Anna}, title = {Cognitive load promotes honesty}, series = {Psychological Research}, volume = {87}, journal = {Psychological Research}, number = {3}, doi = {10.1007/s00426-022-01686-8}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-324913}, pages = {826-844}, year = {2023}, abstract = {In three experiments, we examined the cognitive underpinnings of self-serving dishonesty by manipulating cognitive load under different incentive structures. Participants could increase a financial bonus by misreporting outcomes of private die rolls without any risk of detection. At the same time, they had to remember letter strings of varying length. If honesty is the automatic response tendency and dishonesty is cognitively demanding, lying behavior should be less evident under high cognitive load. This hypothesis was supported by the outcome of two out of three experiments. We further manipulated whether all trials or only one random trial determined payoff to modulate reward adaptation over time (Experiment 2) and whether payoff was framed as a financial gain or loss (Experiment 3). The payoff scheme of one random or all trials did not affect lying behavior and, discordant to earlier research, facing losses instead of gains did not increase lying behavior. Finally, cognitive load and incentive frame interacted significantly, but contrary to our assumption gains increased lying under low cognitive load. While the impact of cognitive load on dishonesty appears to be comparably robust, motivational influences seem to be more elusive than commonly assumed in current theorizing.}, language = {en} } @article{FoersterPfisterReussetal.2017, author = {Foerster, Anna and Pfister, Roland and Reuss, Heiko and Kunde, Wilfried}, title = {Commentary: Feeling the Conflict: The Crucial Role of Conflict Experience in Adaptation}, series = {Frontiers in Psychology}, volume = {8}, journal = {Frontiers in Psychology}, number = {1405}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01405}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-190032}, year = {2017}, abstract = {A commentary on: Feeling the Conflict: The Crucial Role of Conflict Experience in Adaptationby Desender, K., Van Opstal, F., and Van den Bussche, E. (2014). Psychol. Sci. 25, 675-683. doi:10.1177/0956797613511468 Conflict adaptation in masked priming has recently been proposed to rely not on successful conflictresolution but rather on conflict experience (Desender et al., 2014). We re-assessed this proposal ina direct replication and also tested a potential confound due toconflict strength. The data supported this alternative view, but also failed to replicate basic conflict adaptation effects of the original studydespite considerable power.}, language = {en} } @article{WirthFoersterKundeetal.2020, author = {Wirth, Robert and Foerster, Anna and Kunde, Wilfried and Pfister, Roland}, title = {Design choices: Empirical recommendations for designing two-dimensional finger-tracking experiments}, series = {Behavior Research Methods}, volume = {52}, journal = {Behavior Research Methods}, doi = {10.3758/s13428-020-01409-0}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-235569}, pages = {2394-2416}, year = {2020}, abstract = {The continuous tracking of mouse or finger movements has become an increasingly popular research method for investigating cognitive and motivational processes such as decision-making, action-planning, and executive functions. In the present paper, we evaluate and discuss how apparently trivial design choices of researchers may impact participants' behavior and, consequently, a study's results. We first provide a thorough comparison of mouse- and finger-tracking setups on the basis of a Simon task. We then vary a comprehensive set of design factors, including spatial layout, movement extent, time of stimulus onset, size of the target areas, and hit detection in a finger-tracking variant of this task. We explore the impact of these variations on a broad spectrum of movement parameters that are typically used to describe movement trajectories. Based on our findings, we suggest several recommendations for best practice that avoid some of the pitfalls of the methodology. Keeping these recommendations in mind will allow for informed decisions when planning and conducting future tracking experiments.}, language = {en} } @article{FoersterPfisterSchmidtsetal.2013, author = {Foerster, Anna and Pfister, Roland and Schmidts, Constantin and Dignath, David and Kunde, Wilfried}, title = {Honesty saves time (and justifications)}, series = {Frontiers in Psychology}, volume = {4}, journal = {Frontiers in Psychology}, issn = {1664-1078}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00473}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-190451}, year = {2013}, abstract = {A commentary on Honesty requires time (and lack of justifications) by Shalvi, S., Eldar, O., and Bereby-Meyer, Y. (2012). Psychol. Sci. 23, 1264-1270. doi: 10.1177/0956797612443835}, language = {en} } @article{PfisterFoerster2022, author = {Pfister, Roland and Foerster, Anna}, title = {How to measure post-error slowing: The case of pre-error speeding}, series = {Behavior Research Methods}, volume = {54}, journal = {Behavior Research Methods}, number = {1}, issn = {1554-3528}, doi = {10.3758/s13428-021-01631-4}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-273244}, pages = {435-443}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Post-error slowing is one of the most widely employed measures to study cognitive and behavioral consequences of error commission. Several methods have been proposed to quantify the post-error slowing effect, and we discuss two main methods: The traditional method of comparing response times in correct post-error trials to response times of correct trials that follow another correct trial, and a more recent proposal of comparing response times in correct post-error trials to the corresponding correct pre-error trials. Based on thorough re-analyses of two datasets, we argue that the latter method provides an inflated estimate by also capturing the (partially) independent effect of pre-error speeding. We propose two solutions for improving the assessment of human error processing, both of which highlight the importance of distinguishing between initial pre-error speeding and later post-error slowing.}, language = {en} } @article{FoersterPfisterWirthetal.2023, author = {Foerster, Anna and Pfister, Roland and Wirth, Robert and Kunde, Wilfried}, title = {Post-execution monitoring in dishonesty}, series = {Psychological Research}, volume = {87}, journal = {Psychological Research}, number = {3}, doi = {10.1007/s00426-022-01691-x}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-324862}, pages = {845-861}, year = {2023}, abstract = {When telling a lie, humans might engage in stronger monitoring of their behavior than when telling the truth. Initial evidence has indeed pointed towards a stronger recruitment of capacity-limited monitoring processes in dishonest than honest responding, conceivably resulting from the necessity to overcome automatic tendencies to respond honestly. Previous results suggested monitoring to be confined to response execution, however, whereas the current study goes beyond these findings by specifically probing for post-execution monitoring. Participants responded (dis)honestly to simple yes/no questions in a first task and switched to an unrelated second task after a response-stimulus interval of 0 ms or 1000 ms. Dishonest responses did not only prolong response times in Task 1, but also in Task 2 with a short response-stimulus interval. These findings support the assumption that increased monitoring for dishonest responses extends beyond mere response execution, a mechanism that is possibly tuned to assess the successful completion of a dishonest act.}, language = {en} } @article{FoersterMoellerFringsetal.2023, author = {Foerster, Anna and Moeller, Birte and Frings, Christian and Pfister, Roland}, title = {What is left after an error? Towards a comprehensive account of goal-based binding and retrieval}, series = {Attention, Perception, \& Psychophysics}, volume = {85}, journal = {Attention, Perception, \& Psychophysics}, number = {1}, doi = {10.3758/s13414-022-02609-w}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-324851}, pages = {120-139}, year = {2023}, abstract = {The cognitive system readily detects and corrects erroneous actions by establishing episodic bindings between representations of the acted upon stimuli and the intended correct response. If these stimuli are encountered again, they trigger the retrieval of the correct response. Thus, binding and retrieval efficiently pave the way for future success. The current study set out to define the role of the erroneous response itself and explicit feedback for the error during these processes of goal-based binding and retrieval. Two experiments showed robust and similar binding and retrieval effects with and without feedback and pointed towards sustained activation of the unbound, erroneous response. The third experiment confirmed that the erroneous response is more readily available than a neutral alternative. Together, the results demonstrate that episodic binding biases future actions toward success, guided primarily through internal feedback processes, while the erroneous response still leaves detectable traces in human action control.}, language = {en} }