An electrophysiological signal that precisely tracks the emergence of error awareness

Abstract

Recent electrophysiological research has sought to elucidate the neural mechanisms necessary for the conscious awareness of action errors. Much of this work has focused on the error positivity (Pe), a neural signal that is specifically elicited by errors that have been consciously perceived. While awareness appears to be an essential prerequisite for eliciting the Pe, the precise functional role of this component has not been identified. Twenty-nine participants performed a novel variant of the Go/No-go Error Awareness Task (EAT) in which awareness of commission errors was indicated via a separate speeded manual response. Independent component analysis (ICA) was used to isolate the Pe from other stimulus- and response-evoked signals. Single-trial analysis revealed that Pe peak latency was highly correlated with the latency at which awareness was indicated. Furthermore, the Pe was more closely related to the timing of awareness than it was to the initial erroneous response. This finding was confirmed in a separate study which derived IC weights from a control condition in which no indication of awareness was required, thus ruling out motor confounds. A receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) curve analysis showed that the Pe could reliably predict whether an error would be consciously perceived up to 400 ms before the average awareness response. Finally, Pe latency and amplitude were found to be significantly correlated with overall error awareness levels between subjects. Our data show for the first time that the temporal dynamics of the Pe trace the emergence of error awareness. These findings have important implications for interpreting the results of clinical EEG studies of error processing.

When the rules are reversed: Action-monitoring consequences of reversing stimulus–response mappings

“…Pe was reduced in switch blocks, consistent with previous studies (Ikeda & Hasegawa, 2012;Tanaka, 2009), suggesting that overall conscious awareness of and attention to errors was attenuated or delayed (Hughes & Yeung, 2011;Murphy et al, 2012;Ridderinkhof, Ramautar, & Wijnen, 2009). If SPRC extended the time needed for processing through response selection, it would have compressed the time available for later processes to generate conscious error awareness .…”

“…If SPRC extended the time needed for processing through response selection, it would have compressed the time available for later processes to generate conscious error awareness . Increasing evidence has linked the Pe to conscious awareness and posterror behavioral adjustments (Frank et al, 2007;Murphy et al, 2012;Steinhauser & Yeung, 2010). It stands to reason, then, that slower error RTs would lead to a reduced opportunity for error awareness, and thus to both lower Pe amplitudes and less successful posterror adjustment.…”

“…Unlike the ERN and N2, the Pe has not yet been incorporated into a formal action-monitoring model (Overbeek et al, 2005;Orr & Carrasco, 2011). Nonetheless, increasing evidence suggests that the Pe reflects the visceral awareness and conscious recognition of having made a mistake (Endrass, Franke, & Kathmann, 2005;Murphy, Robertson, Allen, Hester, & O'Connell, 2012;Nieuwenhuis, Ridderinkhof, Blom, Band, & Kok, 2001;O'Connell et al, 2009;Shalgi, Barkan, & Deouell, 2009). The growing consensus is that the Pe reflects processes related to errors (i.e., awareness or evaluation of errors) per se, whereas the ERN might index a more general conflict signal (Hughes & Yeung, 2011).…”

Students’ Mindsets for Learning and Their Neural Underpinnings

“…It was found that growth mindset is associated with an enhancement of the Pe (Moser, Schroder, Heeter, Moran, & Lee, 2011;Schroder, Moran, Donnellan, & Moser, 2014), an ERP reflecting awareness of and attention allocation to mistakes (Endrass, Franke, & Kathmann, 2005;Klein, Ullsperger, & Danielmeier, 2013;Murphy, Robertson, Allen, Hester, & O'Connell, 2012;Nieuwenhuis, Ridderinkhof, Blom, Band, & Kok, 2001). More growth-minded individuals have shown superior accuracy after mistakes compared to those endorsing more of a fixed mindset.…”

“…Pe is thought to reflect a conscious registration of an error, which is followed by a binary (correct vs. error) assessment of the response. It has been suggested that Pe might be associated with conscious awareness of an error (Endrass, Franke, & Kathmann, 2005;Klein, Ullsperger, & Danielmeier, 2013;Murphy, Robertson, Allen, Hester, & O'Connell, 2012;Nieuwenhuis, Ridderinkhof, Blom, Band, & Kok, 2001), the accumulation of evidence on the occurrence of an error (Steinhauser & Yeung, 2010), and motivated attention allocation to the error (Ridderinkhof, Ramautar, & Wijnen, 2009). P3, in turn, is elicited by target stimuli in attended inputs at 200 -600 ms after target onset (Donchin & Coles, 1988).…”