Post-Error Behavioral Adjustments Are Facilitated by Activation and Suppression of Task-Relevant and Task-Irrelevant Information Processing

Abstract

Errormonitoringbytheposteriormedialfrontalcortex(pMFC)hasbeenlinkedtopost-errorbehavioraladaptationeffectsandcognitivecontrol dynamics in lateral prefrontal cortex (LPFC). It remains unknown, however, whether control adjustments following errors produce post-error behavioral adjustments (PEBAs) by inhibiting inappropriate responses or facilitating goal-directed ones. Here we used functional magnetic resonance imaging to investigate the hemodynamic correlates of PEBAs in a stimulus-response compatibility task. Our task was designed to test whetherPEBAsareimplementedbysuppressingmotorresponsesprimedbyirrelevantstimulusfeatures(facelocation),redirectingattentionto relevant features (face gender), or both or neither of these possibilities. Independent of PEBAs, error-related pMFC activation was followed by post-error recruitment of prefrontal and parietal control regions and, crucially, both (1) suppressed response-related activity in sensorimotor cortex and (2) enhanced target processing in face-sensitive sensory cortex ("fusiform face area"). More importantly, by investigating the covariation between post-error hemodynamic activity and individual differences in PEBAs, we showed that modulation of task-related motor and sensory processing was dependent on whether participants produced generally slower responses ("post-error slowing"; PES) or selectively reduced interference effects ("post-error reduction of interference"; PERI), respectively. Each of these behaviorally dependent effects was mediated by distinct LPFC control mechanisms (PES: inferior frontal junction; PERI: superior frontal sulcus). While establishing relationships between PEBAs and cognitive control, our findings suggest that the neural architecture underlying sequential behavioral adaptation may be determined primarily by how control is executed by the individual when adjustments are needed.

Memory-reliant Post-error Slowing Is Associated with Successful Learning and Fronto-occipital Activity

“…We also find that, in addition to rIFG activation, bilateral middle occipital cortex activity scales with the amount of post-error slowing on the next same pair trial. The parametric modulation of activity in these higher-order visual regions may reflect that they are involved in processing stimulus features when the features are particularly relevant for memory storage King et al, 2010;Ishai, Ungerleider, Martin, & Haxby, 2000). This is supported by our finding that bilateral middle occipital cortex activity overlapped with activity that varied parametrically with the unsigned prediction error.…”

“…Our results suggest that rIFG implements memoryreliant inhibitory processes after negative feedback in particular as indicated by our fMRI results and thus plays a role in generating the post-error slowing. Unlike tasks that require immediate error correction, such as the classical Eriksen Flanker task (Siegert et al, 2014) or a Simon task (e.g., Danielmeier, Eichele, Forstmann, Tittgemeyer, & Ullsperger, 2011;King, Korb, von Cramon, & Ullsperger, 2010), feedback has little conceptual meaning for the immediate subsequent pair-unspecific trial in the current reinforcement learning task. Previously, no speed adjustments have been found on the direct next trial (Cavanagh et al, 2010;Frank et al, 2007), and we even find post-error speeding on the direct next trial.…”

“…More generally, tasks in which storage or maintenance of value or knowledge is required over several trials evoke associated activity in lateral PFC (Curtis & D'Esposito, 2003). This stands in contrast to paradigms in which the immediate next trial calls for adjustments, such as in Simon or Stroop tasks, where brain activity predicting response threshold adaptation is often seen predominantly in medial error-related processing regions, for instance, in ACC (King et al, 2010;Kerns et al, 2004; however, see also Hester, Barre, Murphy, Silk, & Mattingley, 2008, for an involvement of medial PFC in maintenance of feedback information over several trials).…”

“…Ventrolateral PFC receives converging input from the ventral visual stream, for example, information about the shape and color of stimuli (Takahashi, Ohki, & Kim, 2012;Sakagami & Pan, 2007), which it can then convert into templates for motor commands (Sakagami & Pan, 2007). Previous studies have shown that different regions in medial and lateral frontal cortex selectively interact with task-relevant and task-irrelevant brain areas to maintain sensory information needed for future decisions in memory (Spitzer et al, 2014;King et al, 2010;see Gazzaley & Nobre, 2012, for a review). The current finding opens up the question as to whether there is a dynamic interplay between frontal areas and occipital regions that relies on information from lower level processes of detailed visual stimuli features that are in themselves calling for response speed adaptations dependent on feedback or whether the interaction between reinforcement processes and cognitive control takes place higher up in the processing hierarchy.…”

Posterior Medial Frontal Cortex Activity Predicts Post-Error Adaptations in Task-Related Visual and Motor Areas

“…Thus, following errors, it might be a useful strategy that the pMFC not only modulates task-relevant visual areas to enable better performance but also triggers the slowing of the next motor response, which may provide more time for task-focused visual encoding processes. However, activity decreases in motor areas (King et al, 2010) and PES (Notebaert et al, 2009) might be a very general post-error effect that could be functionally independent from activity modulations in visual areas.…”