Considering the design features of this paradigm, Lange and
Eggert’s (2014) experiment exposed participants to the same act
of self-control twice. As a consequence, their design failed to control
for the impact of cognitions or affective experiences that develop
during self-control operations, on willingness to exercise selfcontrol.
This methodology might have ‘masked’ the proposed glucose
effects in their studies for a number of reasons. The reasons include
(i) development of response strategies that diminish the need to
rely on self-control resources and, as a result, the need for glucose
(Study 1); (ii) enhanced levels of boredom that participants might
have experienced as a result of engaging in the same self-control
task twice (Study 1); and (iii) low levels of optimism and selfefficacy
that might have been developed as a result of receiving
negative feedback (Study 2). These factors may have introduced confounds
which masked the glucose effect on self-control in their
experiments. Importantly, the experiments are inconsistent with the
widely-used dual-task paradigm rife in the depletion literature. For
their study to make a viable and robust test of the glucose effect, a
high-powered, precise replication of an experiment using two separate
tasks that have been previously adopted in the depletion
literature seems to be the minimum criterion.
Considering the design features of this paradigm, Lange andEggert’s (2014) experiment exposed participants to the same actof self-control twice. As a consequence, their design failed to controlfor the impact of cognitions or affective experiences that developduring self-control operations, on willingness to exercise selfcontrol.This methodology might have ‘masked’ the proposed glucoseeffects in their studies for a number of reasons. The reasons include(i) development of response strategies that diminish the need torely on self-control resources and, as a result, the need for glucose(Study 1); (ii) enhanced levels of boredom that participants mighthave experienced as a result of engaging in the same self-controltask twice (Study 1); and (iii) low levels of optimism and selfefficacythat might have been developed as a result of receivingnegative feedback (Study 2). These factors may have introduced confoundswhich masked the glucose effect on self-control in theirexperiments. Importantly, the experiments are inconsistent with thewidely-used dual-task paradigm rife in the depletion literature. Fortheir study to make a viable and robust test of the glucose effect, ahigh-powered, precise replication of an experiment using two separatetasks that have been previously adopted in the depletionliterature seems to be the minimum criterion.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..