This article presents a quasi‐experiment ( N = 79 university students) testing whether individual differences in action‐state orientation moderate primed cognitive conflict's effects on sympathetically mediated cardiac response during task performance reflecting effort. Action control theory posits that action‐oriented individuals are less receptive to distracting affective stimuli during goal pursuit than state‐oriented individuals because action‐orientation is related to higher volitional skills. Therefore, we expected that action‐oriented individuals should be shielded against conflict primes' effect on effort‐related responses in the cardiovascular system. By contrast, state‐oriented individuals should be more sensitive to irrelevant negative affective stimulation and therefore mobilize higher resources under such conditions. Responses of the cardiac pre‐ejection period (PEP) during a moderately difficult short‐term memory task corroborated these predictions. The present findings provide the first evidence that individual differences in action‐state orientation indeed moderate previously demonstrated cognitive conflict priming effects on effort‐related cardiac response and extend recent findings on action shielding.