Date created: | Last Updated:

Category: Project

Description: Background: The Effort-Expenditure for Reward Task (EEfRT) has gained validity evidence from various clinical and non-clinical studies and is one of the most common behavioral tools to measure approach motivation. However, various modifications have been applied to the original version, which have never been compared systematically. Here we tried to examine the reliability and validity of two different versions of the EEfRT within two samples. Hypothesis: We expected both versions of the EEfRT to show good reliability and both trait BAS and trait anticipatory pleasure to positively correlate with effort allocation. Therefore, we analyzed the correlations between traits and task performance in different EEfRT trial categories (reward magnitude, probability of reward attainment), compared task performance, and analyzed self-reported strategy usage and motivation. Methods: In study 1 we tested 120 healthy participants (78,3% female) aged 18 - 35 in a counterbalanced within-subject design to directly compare both versions of the EEfRT. In study 2 we tested a larger sample of 394 healthy participants (68,2% female) aged 18 - 50 to replicate the reliability and validity of the original EEfRT. Results: We replicated the split-half reliability of both task versions and the validity of basic task variables across both studies. However, trait BAS and trait anticipatory pleasure correlated positively with only some task performance parameters in Study 1 that did not replicate for the original EEfRT in Study 2. Furthermore, associations with self-reported motivation to win money hinted at a possible advantage for the validity of the modified EEfRT. Discussion: Our results indicate complex and sometimes inconsistent relations between different personality traits, task properties, and reward attributes. Therefore, we discuss the nature of self-reports and behavioral tasks and suggest the usage of tasks accessing various kinds of costs and benefits within one experimental design to replicate and extend our exploratory findings.