Cited by 1,077Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesBehavioral Health and InterventionsFree Will and Agency

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 196 of the 196 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Toward a Rational and Mechanistic Account of Mental Effort

Open access

Abstract

In spite of its familiar phenomenology, the mechanistic basis for mental effort remains poorly understood. Although most researchers agree that mental effort is aversive and stems from limitations in our capacity to exercise cognitive control, it is unclear what gives rise to those limitations and why they result in an experience of control as costly. The presence of these control costs also raises further questions regarding how best to allocate mental effort to minimize those costs and maximize the attendant benefits. This review explores recent advances in computational modeling and empirical research aimed at addressing these questions at the level of psychological process and neural mechanism, examining both the limitations to mental effort exertion and how we manage those limited cognitive resources. We conclude by identifying remaining challenges for theoretical accounts of mental effort as well as possible applications of the available findings to understanding the causes of and potential solutions for apparent failures to exert the mental effort required of us.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev-neuro-072116-031526

Cites

196 of 196 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

1 retracted

Show all 196 references

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Allport DA, 1994, Attention and Performance XV: Conscious and Nonconscious Information Processing, 421
  2. 10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1252 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Bonnelle V, 2015, Cereb. Cortex, 26, 807
  4. Dunn TL, 2016, J. Exp. Psychol., 42, 1372
  5. Geana A, 2016, Proc. 38th Annu. Conf. Cogn. Sci. Soc., Philadelphia, 1751
  6. Kahneman D, 1973, Attention and Effort
  7. Musslick S, 2016, Parallel processing capability versus efficiency of representation in neural networks
  8. Musslick S, 2015, A computational model of control allocation based on the expected value of control
  9. Sternberg S, 1969, Am. Sci., 57, 421
  10. Todd MT, 2009, Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., 21, 1689
  11. Wickens DD, 1984, Varieties of Attention, 63

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–400 of 1,000

Metadata

Authors
Shenhav, A., Musslick, S., Lieder, F., Kool, W., Griffiths, T. L., Cohen, J. D., & Botvinick, M. M.
Affiliations
  • Brown University (US)
  • Princeton University (US)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Google DeepMind (United Kingdom) (GB)
Corresponding author
Shenhav, Amitai
Venue
Annual Review of Neuroscience
Published
2017-07-25
Volume
40
Issue
1
Pages
99-124
ISSN
  • 0147-006X (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-4126
OpenAlex
W2600886565
Cited by
1,077
References
196
Citations by year
2026: 124 · 2025: 122 · 2024: 149 · 2023: 117 · 2022: 123 · 2021: 124 · 2020: 112 · 2019: 117 · 2018: 60 · 2017: 23
FWCI
9.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annual Review of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Free Will and Agency
Keywords
cognitive effort, cognitive control, effort cost, cognitive resource allocation, aversive experience, cognitive limitations
MeSH terms
Cognition, Decision Making, Humans, Motivation, Reward, Prefrontal Cortex, Executive Function

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review