Participants who thought they were wearing fake sunglasses cheated significantly more on two experimental tasks than those who thought they were wearing authentic sunglasses.
While the bottom-up effects are clearly of more importance in these experimental tasks, the examination of brain activation correlates shows that additional information is not completely ignored, as is discussed below.
However, a number of experimental studies have shown that manipulating level of goal/action identification causally influences self-control on a range of experimental tasks, with more abstract level of identification producing greater resistance to temptation than more concrete level of identification (Fujita & Han, 2009; Fujita et al., 2006; Schmeichel & Vohs, 2009).
Secondly, expectancies are often broken (a saliency signal) in the many verbal and nonverbal experimental tasks, which more commonly deactivate AG and activate DPC.
More recently, researchers have used experimental tasks in ecologically relevant contexts, namely contexts in which object use is necessary to reach a specific goal rather than those in which participants are directly asked to use a particular object (e.g., Cochet and Vauclair 2012).
A challenge for future research is to develop experimental tasks that would be more suitable for use in repeated measure designs (e.g. Berna, Lang, Goodwin, & Holmes, 2011).
Second, a pilot study was conducted to show that the experimental tasks could induce fatigue effectively, and workers made more errors in a fatigue state.
However in both experimental tasks, mean COP displacement speeds in the M/L and A/P directions seem to be more reliable than the sway area variable.
Of note is the finding is that there is relatively more frontal involvement (including left ACC, left medial PFC, and left dorsolateral PFC) during the control tasks than during the experimental tasks.
