Decision Making
Progressive Ratio Task
Also called: progressive ratio schedule, breakpoint task, PR task, progressive ratio breakpoint task
Measure how much work a person will do for points as each win needs twice as many key presses, scored as the breakpoint, the presses of the last win.
3-12 minTimed: desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad
Free to start: 10 free participants per account, then $0.99 per participant for academic research, or any yearly plan. Preview any test free after you sign up.
- Papers, 2021 to 2025
- 68
- Evidence grade
- C
- Registered clinical studies
- 13
What it measures
Measures how much work a person will do for a reward. Participants press the space bar for points; each win needs twice as many presses as the one before, and they may stop at any time. The main score is the breakpoint, the presses of the last win.
Constructs
- Effort-based motivation
- Reward value
- Persistence
- Amotivation
Research uses
- Amotivation research in schizophrenia
- Depression and anhedonia research
- Motivation research across development
- Within-study group comparison
How the paradigm works
The progressive ratio task measures how much work a person will do for a reward (Hodos, 1961). Each win pays 10 points for pressing the space bar. The first win takes 4 presses and each later win takes twice as many as the one before (8, 16, 32 and so on), the schedule of the food reinforcement task used with children and adults (Rollins and colleagues, 2014). A bar fills with each press. The participant may stop at any time with the Stop button and keeps every point won. The run also ends after 60 seconds without a press and at a time limit, 10 minutes as standard. The points, the practice and these limits were written for this test.
More about the paradigm
A check question on when the participant may stop and a short practice come first: two practice wins, then a ratio on which the participant is asked to try the Stop button. After each win, "+10 points" shows for 1 second, and presses then are not counted. The study decides what the points are worth, and the payment line says whether they are exchanged for money.
The main score is the breakpoint, the presses of the last win (Hodos, 1961). Total presses, wins, the time between presses, the pause after each win and what ended the run are also given. People with schizophrenia had lower breakpoints than controls, and lower breakpoints went with more clinical amotivation, on a version where each response was a number comparison (Wolf and colleagues, 2014). People with unipolar or bipolar depression also had lower breakpoints than controls (Hershenberg and colleagues, 2016). In 847 children, breakpoints rose with age, mostly because older children pressed faster within a 10-minute limit (Chelonis, Gravelin and Paule, 2011). When the time limit ends the run, the breakpoint is a lower bound, and the session is flagged. Scores support research and do not diagnose.
Scores
- Breakpointcount
- Presses needed for the last win, the largest ratio completed: 4, 8, 16 and so on. 0 when no win.
- Higher means more work for the same points
- Total Pressescount
- Presses counted in the test part, the unfinished ratio's included.
- Higher means more work
- Winscount
- Ratios completed. On the doubling schedule this is the breakpoint's step: 1 for 4 presses, 2 for 8, and so on.
- Higher means more work for the same points
- Points Wonpoints
- Points won in the test part, 10 for each win.
- Informational
- Presses Into the Last Ratiocount
- Presses made on the ratio that was not finished when the run ended.
- Informational
- Press Intervalms
- Median time between presses within a ratio.
- Lower means faster pressing
- Pause After a Winms
- Median time from a ratio's start to its first press, after the first win.
- Informational
- Run Timems
- Time from the first ratio's start to the end of the run.
- Informational
- Stopped by Choiceflag
- 1 when the participant ended the run with the Stop button, 0 otherwise.
- Informational
- Time Limit Reachedflag
- 1 when the time limit ended the run; the breakpoint is then a lower bound.
- 1 limits interpretation
- Ended by a Pauseflag
- 1 when 60 seconds without a press ended the run.
- Informational
- Check Correctflag
- 1 when the check question on when the participant may stop was answered correctly, 0 when not.
- 1 supports interpretation
Use and evidence
68 papers from 2021 to 2025 name this task in their title or abstract, up 26% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 229 of 395 test families in our census. See the counts for every test.
Show the numbers
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 14 |
| 2024 | 14 |
| 2023 | 14 |
| 2022 | 14 |
| 2021 | 12 |
| 2020 | 11 |
| 2019 | 9 |
| 2018 | 8 |
| 2017 | 15 |
| 2016 | 11 |
| 2015 | 6 |
| 2014 | 11 |
| 2013 | 7 |
| 2012 | 7 |
| 2011 | 5 |
| 2010 | 5 |
| 2009 | 2 |
| 2008 | 1 |
| 2007 | 1 |
| 2006 | 1 |
| 2005 | 3 |
| 2004 | 2 |
| 2003 | 1 |
| 2002 | 1 |
| 2001 | 1 |
| 2000 | 2 |
Use grade D
30 to 99 papers from 2021 to 2025.
Evidence grade C
At least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies.
- Papers on test-retest reliability
- 0
- Papers on reliability or validity
- 10
- Registered clinical studies using it as an outcome
- 13
Note on the counts: most counted papers are animal studies.
How the grades work
Use: A is 1,000 or more papers from 2021 to 2025, B 300 to 999, C 100 to 299, D 30 to 99 and E fewer than 30. Evidence: A means at least 25 papers report its test-retest reliability and at least 25 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome; B, at least 8 test-retest papers, and either 5 registered clinical studies or 150 reliability or validity papers; C, at least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies; D, little published measurement evidence found. The counts measure use. They include every paper that names the task in its title or abstract. Grades describe the published research on this task, not ConductCognition's version of it.
Source: ConductCognition test census 0.14.0, counted 2 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Task design
The trial sequence as the test runs in ConductCognition.
- Schedule
- Each win pays 10 points. The first win takes 4 presses of the space bar and each later win twice as many: 4, 8, 16, 32 and so on. A bar fills with each press.
- Stopping
- A Stop button, confirmed once, ends the run at any time. The run also ends after 60 seconds without a press, or at the time limit.
- Time limit
- 10 minutes (standard, 5 to 10). The first 8 wins take 1,020 presses and the first 9 take 2,044.
- Win
- "+10 points" shows for 1,000 ms after each win, and presses then are not counted.
- Practice
- A check question on when the participant may stop, then practice wins of 3 and 6 presses and a ratio of 12 on which the participant tries the Stop button.
- Key
- The space bar, read by position or character. A held key does not count, and a press has no stimulus to react to, so none is an anticipation.
The doubling schedule is the human one of the food reinforcement task (Rollins and colleagues, 2014), here for points of the study's choosing. Studies of schizophrenia and depression used other rewards, schedules and responses, such as number comparisons for money (Wolf and colleagues, 2014), so their breakpoints are on other scales. When the time limit ends the run, the breakpoint is a lower bound and the session is flagged. The scores support research and do not diagnose.
Quality checks
Each session is marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason, before you see its scores.
Scored rows: progressive_ratio_ratio from the scored run, one per ratio of the test part. How long to keep pressing has no correct answer, so neither accuracy nor a repeated choice is judged, and stopping early is a result, not a miss. A run with no press that ended without the Stop button is invalid. A run that the time limit ended, a run with no recorded end and a wrong answer to the check question are flagged.
Why these rules
There is no correct option to compare with chance, so accuracy is not judged against chance. The breakpoint is where a person stops working, so any breakpoint, 0 included, can be a real result when the person chose to stop; a run with no press that only timed out shows no choice at all. When the time limit ends the run, the breakpoint is a lower bound, so the session is flagged. A press has no stimulus to react to, so no press is an anticipation. A hidden tab keeps key presses from reaching the task while the time runs, so a percentile is withheld after one.
No percentile. Scores and quality flags only.
Running this test
Settings you can change
| Setting | Standard | Allowed |
|---|---|---|
| Time limit (minutes) | 10 | 5 to 10 |
| Payment line | Hypothetical points (standard) | Hypothetical points (standard), The study pays for points |
Yearly plans can change settings within these limits. Free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Need a setting this test does not have?
Devices and languages
- Timed test: participants need a desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad. Participant devices
- Languages: English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese.
- Available on: Every plan, including the free plan.
- No percentile. Scores and quality flags only. How norms work
- Recruiting online? See the setup guides for Prolific, Sona Systems, CloudResearch Connect and Qualtrics.
Cite and describe
Participants completed the Progressive Ratio Task in a web browser (ConductCognition task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0; Hodos, 1961), with the standard settings (time limit (minutes): 10; payment line: Hypothetical points). The main score was breakpoint (presses needed for the last win, the largest ratio completed: 4, 8, 16 and so on. 0 when no win).
ConductCognition versions: task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0. Every export records the versions each session used, for a methods section.
- Hodos, W. (1961). Progressive ratio as a measure of reward strength. Science, 134(3483), 943-944. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.134.3483.943
- Rollins, B. Y., Loken, E., Savage, J. S., & Birch, L. L. (2014). Measurement of food reinforcement in preschool children: Associations with food intake, BMI, and reward sensitivity. Appetite, 72, 21-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2013.09.018The schedule of 4 presses doubling with each reward, also used with older children and adults.
- Chelonis, J. J., Gravelin, C. R., & Paule, M. G. (2011). Assessing motivation in children using a progressive ratio task. Behavioural Processes, 87(2), 203-209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2011.03.008Breakpoints by age and sex in 847 children pressing a lever for 10 minutes.
- Wolf, D. H., Satterthwaite, T. D., Kantrowitz, J. J., Katchmar, N., Vandekar, L., Elliott, M. A., & Ruparel, K. (2014). Amotivation in schizophrenia: Integrated assessment with behavioral, clinical, and imaging measures. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 40(6), 1328-1337. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbu026Lower breakpoints in schizophrenia, related to clinical amotivation.
- Hershenberg, R., Satterthwaite, T. D., Daldal, A., Katchmar, N., Moore, T. M., Kable, J. W., & Wolf, D. H. (2016). Diminished effort on a progressive ratio task in both unipolar and bipolar depression. Journal of Affective Disorders, 196, 97-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2016.02.003Lower breakpoints in unipolar and bipolar depression.
- Bismark, A. W., Thomas, M. L., Tarasenko, M., Shiluk, A. L., Rackelmann, S. Y., Young, J. W., & Light, G. A. (2018). Relationship between effortful motivation and neurocognition in schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research, 193, 69-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2017.06.042Points with no stated value, quitting at any time, and a run of about 10 minutes.
Source papers
- Hodos (1961): the breakpoint. Rollins et al. (2014): the doubling schedule. Wolf et al. (2014) and Hershenberg et al. (2016): lower breakpoints in schizophrenia and in depression. Chelonis, Gravelin and Paule (2011): breakpoints by age and sex in 847 children.Paradigm source, Adults
Questions
How long does the Progressive Ratio Task take?
About 3 to 12 minutes, as listed in the test library.
What device does a participant need?
Timed test: participants need a desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad. The browser must be Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.
What scores does it produce?
Breakpoint, Total Presses, Wins, Points Won, Presses Into the Last Ratio, Press Interval, Pause After a Win, Run Time, Stopped by Choice, Time Limit Reached, Ended by a Pause and Check Correct. Each session is also marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason.
How widely is the Progressive Ratio Task used in research?
68 papers from 2021 to 2025 name it in their title or abstract, up 26% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 229 of 395 test families in the ConductCognition test census (use grade D). Source: ConductCognition test census 0.14.0, counted 2 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
How much reliability evidence does the Progressive Ratio Task have?
In the published research, 0 papers report its test-retest reliability and 13 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome (evidence grade C in the ConductCognition test census).
Does it report a percentile?
No. Scores and quality flags only.
Which settings can a researcher change?
Time limit (minutes) (5 to 10) and payment line (Hypothetical points (standard), The study pays for points). Settings can be changed on yearly plans; free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Which languages can participants use?
Participants can take this test in English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese. English is on every plan, and the other languages come with yearly plans. Have a native speaker read the machine-translated text before launch.
Is this a clinical test?
No. ConductCognition is for research use only. It runs, scores and exports the test; clinical interpretation is outside the platform.
Every test: the full test list.
Run this test in your next study
Start free with 10 free participants on any test, then use participant credits or a yearly plan.