Demographic characteristics and descriptive questionnaire measures in the included sample and excluded participants.

Effort-based decision-making task and results.

A: The task can be divided into four phases: a calibration phase to determine individual clicking capacity to calibrate effort-levels, practice trials that participants practice until successful on every effort-level, instructions and a quiz that must be passed, and the main task, consisting of 64 trials split into 4 blocks. B: Each trial consists of an offer with a reward (2,3,4, or 5 points) and an effort level (1,2,3, or 4) that subjects accept or reject. If accepted, a challenge at the respective effort level must be fulfilled to win the points. If rejected, subjects wait for a matched amount of time and receive one point. C: Proportion of accepted trials, averaged across participants and effort-reward combinations. Error bars indicate standard errors. D: Model comparison based on leave-out-out information criterion (LOOIC; lower is beder) and expected log posterior density (ELPD; higher is beder). E: Posterior predictive checks for the full parabolic model, comparing observed vs. model predicted subject-wise acceptance proportions across effort-levels (left) and reward-levels (right).

Associations between task parameter estimates and psychiatric measures.

A: Visualizations of associations between the choice bias task parameter and the Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS), the Dimensional Anhedonia Rating Scale (DARS)67, and the Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES)64 B-C: Comparison of task parameter choice bias (B) and effort sensitivity (C) between a sample of participants meeting criteria for current major depressive disorder (MDD; purple, upper) on the the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview 7.0.1 (M.I.N.I)70 and age- and gender-matched controls (yellow, lower).

Demographic characteristics and descriptive questionnaire measures in the early and late chronotype participants.

Effects of chronotype and time-of-day on task parameter estimates.

A: Effect of chronotype and time-of-day on reward sensitivity parameter estimates. B: Effect of chronotype and time-of-day on choice bias parameter estimates.

Mathematical definition of the models included in our model space.

Parameter recovery.

A-C: Comparison between underlying parameters and recovered mean parameter estimates for the three free parameters of the full parabolic model. D: Pearson’s correlations between all underlying and recovered parameters for the full parabolic model.

Pearson’s correlations between underlying parameters and recovered mean parameter estimates for all models included in the model space.

Computational modelling and test-retest reliability.

A: Model comparison for each testing session based on the leave-one-out information criterion (LOO) and expected log predictive density (ELPD). Error bars indicate standard errors. B: Subject-wise parameter estimates compared between testing sessions. C: Predictive accuracy against chance (left) and group-level parameters (right; values >0 indicate better performance of subject-level compared to group-level parameters). Labels s1s2 (and s2s1) indicate session 1 (session 2) parameters predicting session 2 (session 1) data, s1s1 (and s2s2) indicate session 1 (session 2) parameters predicting session 1 (session 2) data.