Frontal theta accounts for individual differences in the cost of conflict on decision making.

Cognitive conflict is often experienced as a difficult, frustrating, and aversive state. Recent studies have indicated that conflict acts as an implicit cost during learning, valuation, and the instantiation of cognitive control. Here we investigated if an implicit manipulation of conflict also influences explicit decision making to risk. Participants were required to perform a Balloon Analogue Risk Task wherein the virtual balloon was inflated by performing a flankers task. By varying the percent of incongruent flanker trials between balloons, we hypothesized that participants would pump the balloon fewer times in conditions of higher conflict and that frontal midline theta would account for significant variance in this relationship. Across two studies, we demonstrate that conflict did not elicit reliable behavioral changes in this task across participants. However, individual differences in frontal theta power accounted for significant variance by predicting diminished balloon pumps. Thus, while conflict costs may act as investments to some individuals (invigorating behavior), it is aversive to others (diminishing behavior), and frontal midline theta power accounts for these varying behavioral tendencies between individuals. These findings demonstrate how frontal midline theta is not only a candidate mechanism for implementing cognitive control, but it is sensitive to the inherent costs therein.