Introduction

I am a PhD student working under the supervision of Prof. Reinout Wiers (Developmental Psychopathology, UvA), dr. Sanne de Wit (Clinical Psychology, UvA) and Prof. Bernhard Hommel (Cognitive Psychology, Leiden University).
The aim of my research is to investigate the relative contribution of both cognitive and motivational components in action selection, within the context of decision-making that is both adaptive and maladaptive (i.e. as seen in addiction or obesity).

Cognitive and Motivational Components of Decision Making

Key concepts: Ideomotor O-R priming, Goal-directed action, habits, Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer, Pavlovian conditioned responses.
Different aspects of action control are captured by different strands of research. Theories of ideomotor action focus on the perceptual, cognitive aspects of bi-directional response-outcome learning and how this knowledge facilitates possible actions. Research into motivational mechanisms, by contrast highlights the affective component of response-outcome learning and how this knowledge guides eventual action selection.
The fact that ideomotor and motivational approaches are both supported by a large body of evidence suggests that they both capture important aspects of intentional action control. At the same time, they both are incomplete. The ideomotor approach restricts itself to explaining how we come to know which actions are suited to reach which goals. In contrast, the motivational approach focuses on the role of affective actions effects in determining performance without endorsing a particular mechanism for selecting among alternative actions. It is obvious that the two approaches have reciprocal strengths and weaknesses and, thus, might complement each other. We suggest that disrupted functioning of these processes is likely to give rise to different, separable, and characteristic impairments in decision-making, which we investigate in healthy and clinical populations.

Publications

• Watson, P., Wiers, R. W., Hommel, B., & de Wit, S. (2014). Working for food you don’t desire. Cues interfere with goal-directed food-seeking. Appetite, 79C, 139–148.
• Cousijn, J., Watson, P., Koenders, L., Vingerhoets, W.A.M., Goudriaan, A.E. & Wiers, R.W. (2013). Cannabis dependence, Cognitive Control and Attentional Bias for Cannabis Words. Addictive Behaviors. [joint first authorship P.Watson & J. Cousijn]
• Watson, P., Korjoukov, I., Vartak, D., & Roelfsema, P. R. (2013). Luminance contrast has little influence on the spread of object-based attention. Vision Research, 85, 90–103.
• Watson, P. , de Wit, S., Cousijn, J., Hommel, B. and Wiers, R.W. (2013). Motivational mechanisms underlying the approach bias to cigarettes. Journal of Experimental Psychopathology, 4 (3), 250-262.
• Cavanagh, J. F., Neville, D., Cohen, M. X., Van de Vijver, I., Harsay, H., Watson, P. , Buitenweg, J. I., et al. (2012). Individual Differences in Risky Decision-Making Among Seniors Reflect Increased Reward Sensitivity. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 6. 
• Watson, P. , de Wit, S., Hommel, B. and Wiers, R.W. (2012) Motivational mechanisms and outcome expectancies underlying the approach bias toward addictive substances. Frontiers in Psychology, 3 : 440. 
• de Wit, S., Watson, P. , Harsay, H. A., Cohen, M. X., Vijver, I. van de, and Ridderinkhof, K. R. (2012). Corticostriatal Connectivity Underlies Individual Differences in the Balance between Habitual and Goal-Directed Action Control. Journal of Neuroscience 32, 12066-12075. [joint first authorship P.Watson & S. de Wit]

• No ancillary activities