don't really get this study and line of thinking.
Are they saying there's an optimum sweet spot because if you don't exercise self control at all then it's hard to have a decent amount of it.
I will add that maybe some people felt not only 'owed' something but an urge for vengeance. The stricter test condition is not merely one requiring 'self control' but is rather draconian in the degree to which it requires self-control. There is a difference between expecting self-restraint and imposing hardship on people. "What goes around comes around". When you crap on people for purposes of your so-called experiments, don't be all shocked when they crap on you if given the opportunity.
The fact that you imagine this task being 'hard' indicates that you are aware of the mental exhaustion the task will cause. It's actually the exact same explanation given in the article, only you overlook it, because the 'hardness' of the task seems so obvious that you forget to ask why it is 'hard'.
From a classic play by Moliere: Why do sleeping pills make you sleepy? Because they have sleep-inducing qualities!
alternatively, it might even be the same task, but two groups that have a different attitude to it (some might consider it play, others work).
(i suspect you can also continue down your route, re-labelling things; for example, you might say that people only calls things "work" if, for that individual, they are "theft-inducing". at that point i am not sure if we simply agree to disagree, or if the argument becomes whether you are still learning something new over the original experiment)