the act of making the decision left them with less willpower, as measured afterward in a test of how long they could squeeze a hand grip.
Again and again, the sugar restored willpower, but the artificial sweetener had no effect.
You can see a difference in grip strength following arduous decision making, and consuming glucose restores willpower?
I am aware that cognition is not magic, but I still find these results pretty amazing!
Sure. Some random previous discussions:
The mind is what the brain does, in all truth.
Less surprising perhaps is "Acute hypoglycemia impairs nonverbal intelligence: importance of avoiding ceiling effects in cognitive function testing."; PDF%20Diabetes%20Care%20raven%20alice%20heim%20hypoglycaemia.pdf)
If people's willpower is influenced by glucose levels, I wonder what willpower is like in ketosis...
Interesting question. People doing ketogenic diets tend to report a mental fog for the first two weeks. I'd like to see some of these studies repeated on ketogenic dieters who've stuck with it long enough to get past that initial fog. I wonder to what degree diets are inherently difficult to stick with, sense they both tax willpower and reduce the amount available.
Also, if I ever become a salesman, I'll make sure to do the reciprocity trick from Cialdini--but only bring diet sodas for the customer.
If I understand correctly, ketogenic diets tend to be easier to follow because you're less hungry. This squares up pretty well with my observations of my current high-fat diet.
I should chemically test whether or not I'm in ketosis though, I remember a haze, but I had assumed that it was the results of travelling, drinking, and barely sleeping (two days of bussing + ferry through the Balkans, drinking and staying up late at a wedding (and taking notes on the experience), then a sleep-free transatlantic flight before a car trip from Maryland to North Carolina...) Lots of confounding variables there.
I'd be interested to hear the results of a keto stick test, and perhaps a willpower/glucosepower test.
I'm pretty convinced that this is just a result of glucose shifting the time discounting curve. No "expendable resource" required.
I know there's at least one study that purports to show otherwise, but this explanation is so much more elegant than any other I've yet seen proposed that right now I'm defying the data until this whole area is better understood.
Trading off pain/effort while gripping for...well, whatever it was that made people want to grip the handgrip in the first place. The feeling of having been helpful in the study? Personal pride at believing yourself to have high willpower?
In any case, I think the most important finding is that glucose restores willpower. When making an important decision, pop a soda. How much can this help with akrasia?
And the more tough choices they encountered early in the process — like going through those 56 colors to choose the precise shade of gray or brown — the quicker people became fatigued and settled for the path of least resistance by taking the default option.
This suggests a model of why the RPG genre is the way it is. The character customization and resource management metagame fatigues willpower, so that you take the default action of grinding rather than the non-default action of quitting the game.
Similarly, Minecraft fatigues with creative decisions such as about architectural design, and offers the default of digging for ores.
(Random drops probably also contribute to the decision to keep grinding.)
The last pair of quotes feed into an idea I've been wondering about: is sunk cost bias a useful bias? That is, it seems to me humans frequently underinvest in long-term actions; if we do so, and we are often under the control of desires or blood sugar problems, then it would make sense to continue with long-term projects - 'engage in the sunk cost bias' - if we choose to start the project while rich in willpower but then have to continue the project under less optimal conditions. A good heuristic would be to be stubborn and continue projects even if they seem bad at that moment.
Two other bits of the article are interesting in the light of sunk cost bias. Sunk cost bias, oddly enough, does not seem to appear outside humans/primates. The article points out that choosing trade-offs are the hardest decisions and ones most often engaged in by humans and the very first kind of decisions to degrade in humans; and also that the sugar seems to act not by increasing total sugar but by affecting whether short-term or long-term decision-making areas are activated. This suggests a possibility: the normal brain decision-making structures begin to break down in humans for fundamental metabolic reasons, leading to suboptimal decisions... in the absence of a 'bias' in the opposite direction.
(Baroque or adhoc? Maybe. On the other hand, a lot of mental and biological processes seem to be regulated just by making an opposing process, rather than simply reducing the over-active process.)
A surprisingly good New York Times essay on willpower / ego depletion:
Do You Suffer From Decision Fatigue?
As it turns out, the essay is based on an upcoming Roy F. Baumeister book, "Willpower: Rediscovering the Greatest Human Strength", which will be available from Amazon in a couple of weeks (September 1, 2011) both as a hardcover and a Kindle edition.
Some quotes from the essay (italics and headings mine):
You spend the most willpower when you have to make AND implement your decisions:
Willpower depletion makes you reluctant to make trade-offs:
Willpower depletion makes you more likely to take the path of least resistance:
Testing willpower depletion in rural Indian villages:
Decision fatigue can be a factor in trapping people in poverty:
Glucose restores willpower in humans and dogs:
Ego depletion causes activity to rise in some parts of the brain and to decline in others:
Good decision makers structure their lives so as to conserve willpower: