Currently, there is an ongoing debate about the influencing factors of one's extended reality (XR) experience. Plausibility, congruence, and their role have recently gained more and more attention. One of the latest models to describe XR experiences, the Congruence and Plausibility model (CaP), puts plausibility and congruence right in the center. However, it is unclear what influence they have on the overall XR experience and what influences our perceived plausibility rating. In this paper, we implemented four different incongruencies within a virtual reality scene using breaks in plausibility as an analogy to breaks in presence. These manipulations were either located on the cognitive or perceptual layer of the CaP model. They were also either connected to the task at hand or not. We tested these manipulations in a virtual bowling environment to see which influence they had. Our results show that manipulations connected to the task caused a lower perceived plausibility. Additionally, cognitive manipulations seem to have a larger influence than perceptual manipulations. We were able to cause a break in plausibility with one of our incongruencies. These results show a first direction on how the influence of plausibility in XR can be systematically investigated in the future.