Is Increased Reward Responsivity Responsible for the After-Effects of Self-control? An EEG Approach.

通过资源模型的视角，对自我控制进行了广泛的研究。根据该模型，推翻或改变一个人的反应的能力取决于有限的内在资源或力量[1,2]。自我控制的行为被认为会消耗或耗尽这种力量，导致自我控制能力的暂时下降（即自我消耗）。为了支持这一观点，许多研究发现，从事一项繁重（或消耗）的自我控制任务会暂时削弱随后要求高的任务的表现。然而，有关资源模型有效性的实证争议已经出现。资源模型的初步荟萃分析获得了一致的大效应[3]的证据，但最近的荟萃分析得出结论，在调整发表偏倚后，该效应可以忽略不计[4,5]。然而，在这些后一种元分析中使用的方法，反过来，被称为问题bbb。最后，一项多实验室实验发现，自我控制运动的后遗症不显著[8,9]，而其他预登记的大样本研究报告了统计上显著的影响，尽管比预期的要小。总的来说，这些工作表明，自我控制的资源模型的有效性和自我控制的后果仍然知之甚少。自我控制的奖励反应假说kelley等人最近提出了自我控制的奖励反应假说。这个假设认为，无论自我控制是否成功，行使自我控制的行为都是令人厌恶的，并会产生负面影响。为了消除这种不适，在自我控制之后，寻求奖励的行为可能会被放大，使个体回到温和的积极基线状态。几项研究发现，锻炼自我控制会增加随后的寻求奖励行为，包括饮食、消费和性行为。事实上，这些行为结果可能是由于控制能力的降低（正如其他人最初假设的那样），或者是由于奖励反应和接近动机的增加。此外，有几项研究与这一假设一致，通过让参与者完成与奖励相关的任务，几乎不需要自我控制，从而避免了这种解释上的模糊性。这些研究发现，自我控制的努力增强了自我报告的接近动机[13]和积极的情绪反应[13]。一些自我控制的理论模型也与奖励反应假说相一致。过程模型提出，动机和注意力的转变引导个体从进一步的控制转向奖励[14,15]。综合自我控制理论认为，由于控制努力是费力的，并且依赖于有限的资源，锻炼自我控制最终会使天平向更大的欲望驱动的寻求奖励行为倾斜。基于价值的自我控制选择模型表明，锻炼自我控制会使基于价值的计算倾向于更直接、更快乐的选择，而不是更努力的、符合长期目标的选择[10]。同样，认知失调[18,19]和心理对比[20]对努力的描述都表明，努力引起的厌恶状态使最终结果或奖励显得更有价值。此外，对反调节的研究表明，个体更容易处理与他们的主流情绪状态不一致的信息。就行使自我控制是令人厌恶的而言，反调节将预示着处理与奖励相关的信息会更容易，从而导致在行使自我控制后，注意力向奖励的补偿性转移。最后，动机的对立过程理论假设生物体有维持体内平衡和变化的基本动机

Resource Model of Self-ControlSelf-control has been extensively studied through the lens of the resource model. According to this model, the capacity to override or alter one's responses depends on a limited inner resource or strength [1,2]. Acts of self-control are thought to consume or deplete this strength, resulting in a temporary decline in the capacity for self-control (i.e., ego depletion). In support of this view, numerous studies have found that engaging in a taxing (or depleting) self-control task temporarily undermines performance on subsequent demanding tasks [2]. Nevertheless, empirical controversies related to the validity of the resource model have arisen. An initial meta-analysis of the resource model obtained evidence for consistent, large effects [3], but more recent meta-analyses concluded that the effect is negligible after adjusting for publication bias [4,5]. However, methods used in these latter meta-analyses have, in turn, been called into question [6]. Finally, a multi-laboratory experiment found non-significant aftereffects of self-control exertion [7], whereas other preregistered, large-sample studies reportedstatistically significant, albeit smaller than expected, effects [8,9]. Collectively, these works suggest that the validity of the resource model of self-control and the aftereffects of self-control remain poorly understood.Reward Responsivity Hypothesis of Self-ControlKelley et al. [10] recently proposed a reward responsivity hypothesis of self-control. This hypothesis states that, irrespective of self-control success, the act of exercising self-control is aversive and engenders negative affect [11]; and in order to countermand this discomfort, reward-seeking behaviourmay be amplified after bouts of self-control, to bring individuals back to a mildly positive baseline state. Several studies have found evidence that exercising self-control increases subsequent reward-seeking behaviour, including eating, spending, and sexual behaviour [2]. Indeed, these behavioural outcomescould be due to a reduction in the capacity for control (as others initially assumed) or due to increases in reward responsivity and approach motivation [10]. Besides, several studies, in line with the hypothesis, have circumvented this interpretational ambiguity by having participants' complete reward-related tasksrequiring little to no self-control. These studies find that self-control exertion enhances self-reported approach motivation [12] and positive emotional reactivity [13]. Several theoretical models of self-control are also consistent with the reward responsivity hypothesis. The process model proposes that shifts in motivation and attention steer individuals away from the further engagement of control and toward rewards [14,15]. Integrative self-control theory posits that, because control efforts are taxing and dependent upon finite resources, exercising self-control eventually tips the scales toward greater desire-driven reward-seeking behaviour [16]. Value-based choice models of selfcontrol suggest that exercising self-control shifts valued-based calculations in favour of more immediate, hedonic options over more effortful options in accord with one's long-term goals [17]. Similarly, both cognitive dissonance [18,19] and psychological contrast [20] accounts of effort suggest that aversive states elicited by the exertion of effort make the end-result or reward appear more valuable.Furthermore, research on counter-regulation indicates that individuals more easily process information that is incongruent with their prevailing emotional state [21]. Insofar as exercising self-control is aversive, counter-regulation would predict greater ease in processing reward-relevant information, leading to a compensatory attentional shift towards rewards after exerting self-control. Finally, opponent process theories of motivation assume that organisms have a fundamental motivatation to maintain homeostasis and shifts