Precrastination and individual differences in working memory capacity

Time perspectives and precrastination: Understanding early task completion in a time-moving perspective

This study examines the relationship between precrastination-a tendency to complete tasks early-and the time-moving perspective. Given the opposing nature of precrastination and procrastination, we hypothesize that precrastination correlates positively with a time-moving perspective, based on the finding that procrastination correlates with an ego-moving tendency. To test this, we conducted a survey with 366 participants (172 females aged 17 to 68), assessing their tendencies toward precrastination and their responses to the classic "ambiguous meeting question" (McGlone & Harding, 1998). Participants who selected "Monday" as the answer to the ambiguous time-related question displayed higher precrastination scores than those who chose "Friday," supporting the hypothesis. To address the potential subjectivity of self-reported data, we included an objective measurement by recording participants' arrival times for a scheduled test in a controlled setting involving 84 students (42 females aged 18 to 25). The results showed that participants who arrived early were more likely to choose "Monday" in a modified version of the "ambiguous meeting question," further validating our hypothesis. This study highlights the significant role of precrastination in shaping time perception.

Pre-crastination across physical and cognitive tasks

Pre-crastination refers to the tendency to begin a task as soon as possible, even at the cost of additional effort. This phenomenon is consistently observed in tasks in which participants are asked to select one of two buckets to carry to a target. Surprisingly, on a high proportion of trials participants choose the bucket that is closer to them (and further from the target) as opposed to the bucket that is further from them (and closer to the target). In other words, participants tend to complete the task of picking up a bucket as soon as possible, even when this requires additional physical effort. The purpose of the current experiment was to test whether an individual's tendency to pre-crastinate is stable across tasks. Participants performed a physical load task where they selected one of two buckets to carry to a target. The same participants performed a cognitive load task where they picked up number strings at one of the two bucket locations and mentally carried the number string to a target. We found that participants pre-crastinated in both tasks and this tendency was reduced as task difficulty increased. Importantly, we found a significant association between an individual's tendency to pre-crastinate in the physical load task and their tendency to pre-crastinate in the cognitive load task. Thus, an individual's tendency to pre-crastinate is consistent across tasks and suggests that this is a stable characteristic of how individuals choose to order tasks.

Physical effort precrastination determines preference in an isometric task

How the brain decides when to invest effort is a central question in neuroscience. When asked to walk a mile to a destination, would you choose a path with a hill at the beginning or the end? The traditional view of effort suggests we should be indifferent-all joules are equal so long as it does not interfere with accomplishing the goal. Yet, when total joules are equal across movement decisions, the brain's sensitivity to the temporal profile of effort investment remains poorly understood. Here, we sought to parse the interaction of time and physical effort by comparing subjective preferences in an isometric arm-pushing task that varied the duration and timing of high and low effort. Subjects were presented with a series of two-alternative forced choices, where they chose the force profile they would rather complete. Subjects preferred earlier physical effort (i.e., to precrastinate) but were idiosyncratic about preference for task timing. A model of subjective utility that includes physical effort costs, task costs, and independent temporal sensitivity factors described subject preferences best. Interestingly, deliberation time and response vigor covary with the same subjective utility model for preference, suggesting a utility that underlies both decision making and motor control. These results suggest physical effort costs are temporally sensitive, with earlier investment of effort preferred to later investment, and that the representation of effort is based on not only the total energy required but also when it is required to invest that energy.NEW & NOTEWORTHY We use a novel paradigm that differentiates physical effort costs, task costs, and time, where subjects choose between isometric arm-pushing tasks. Subjects prefer high physical effort earlier than later. They also decide faster and respond more vigorously the greater their preference. We find a generalizable subjective utility model that includes independent time-sensitivity of physical effort and task costs. Together, we demonstrate that subjective effort includes not only the total effort invested but also its timing.

Is precrastination related to updating and inhibition aspects of executive function?

ABSTRACTPrecrastination is the act of completing a task as soon as possible even at the expense of extra effort. Past research has suggested that individuals precrastinate due to a desire to reduce their cognitive load, also known as the cognitive load-reduction (CLEAR) hypothesis [VonderHaar, R. L., McBride, D. M., & Rosenbaum, D. A. (2019). Task order choices in cognitive and perceptual-motor tasks: The cognitive-load-reduction (CLEAR) hypothesis. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 81(7), 2517-2525. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-019-01754-z]. This idea stems from the notion that it is taxing to hold intentions in working memory and completing a task as soon as possible releases cognitive resources for other tasks. Based on this hypothesis, we predicted that aspects of executive function may play a role in precrastination. We tested this prediction using a box-moving task developed in a previous study to measure precrastination. We also incorporated tasks measuring updating and inhibition aspects of executive function: the Stroop interference (both experiments) and Simon tasks (Experiment 2) to measure inhibition and the 2-Back memory task (Experiment 1) to measure updating. We found that the majority of participants precrastinated significantly throughout the box-moving task trials, consistent with results from past studies. However, no relation was found between the executive function tasks and rates of precrastination. These results may be due to the automaticity of precrastination when cognitive resources are limited.

Short-Term Memory Capacity Predicts Willingness to Expend Cognitive Effort for Reward

We must often decide whether the effort required for a task is worth the reward. Past rodent work suggests that willingness to deploy cognitive effort can be driven by individual differences in perceived reward value, depression, or chronic stress. However, many factors driving cognitive effort deployment-such as short-term memory ability-cannot easily be captured in rodents. Furthermore, we do not fully understand how individual differences in short-term memory ability, depression, chronic stress, and reward anticipation impact cognitive effort deployment for reward. Here, we examined whether these factors predict cognitive effort deployment for higher reward in an online visual short-term memory task. Undergraduate participants were grouped into high and low effort groups (n HighEffort = 348, n LowEffort = 81; n Female = 332, n Male = 92, M Age = 20.37, Range Age = 16-42) based on decisions in this task. After completing a monetary incentive task to measure reward anticipation, participants completed short-term memory task trials where they could choose to encode either fewer (low effort/reward) or more (high effort/reward) squares before reporting whether or not the color of a target square matched the square previously in that location. We found that only greater short-term memory ability predicted whether participants chose a much higher proportion of high versus low effort trials. Drift diffusion modeling showed that high effort group participants were more biased than low effort group participants toward selecting high effort trials. Our findings highlight the role of individual differences in cognitive effort ability in explaining cognitive effort deployment choices.

Precrastination and Time Perspective: Evidence from Intertemporal Decision-Making

Although procrastination has been extensively studied, precrastination remains an unsolved puzzle. Precrastination is the tendency to start tasks as soon as possible, even at the cost of extra effort. Using the near bucket paradigm with 81 undergraduate students, this study examined the relationship between precrastination and time perspective, proactive personality, and subjects' differential performance in intertemporal decision-making. The results confirmed the cognitive-load-reduction (CLEAR) hypothesis. Precrastination was found to be positively predicted by the future time dimension of time perspective and negatively predicted by proactive personality. In addition, there is a significant positive correlation between precrastination and delay discounting of intertemporal decision-making, which exists only for the loss situation.

Carrying groceries: More items in early trips than in later trips or the reverse? Implications for pre-crastination

Returning home from the grocery store with a car full of groceries requires decisions about how many bags to carry when. If the decisions exemplify procrastination, people should carry more bags per trip in late trips than in early trips (putting the hard work off until later), but if the decisions exemplify the recently discovered phenomenon of pre-crastination (Rosenbaum et al. in Psychol Sci 25: 1487-1496, 2014), people should carry more bags per trip in early trips than in late trips (doing the hard work early). To distinguish between these possibilities, we asked university students to carry 5 or 11 dodgeballs from one bin to another 4, 8, 12, or 16 feet away in as many trips as they wished. A random half of the subjects did the tasks with an additional requirement to memorize and then recall 7 digits after carrying all the balls from the home to the target bin. Consistent with pre-crastination, participants carried the most balls per trip in early trips, and consistent with the hypothesis that pre-crastination relates to memory load, the number of balls carried per trip was affected by the presence of a memory load. The results add to the growing evidence for the generality of pre-crastination.