The present study investigated the neural dynamics of error processing in both the time and frequency domains, as well as associated behavioral phenomena, at the single-trial level. We used a technique that enabled us to separately investigate the evoked and induced aspects of the EEG signal (Cohen & Donner, 2013, Journal of Neurophysiology, 110[12], 2752-2763). We found that at the single-trial level, while the (evoked) error-related negativity (ERN) predicted only post-error slowing (PES)and only when errors occurred on incongruent trials-induced frontal midline theta power served as a robust predictor of both PES and post-error accuracy (PEA) regardless of stimulus congruency. Mediation models of both electrophysiological indices demonstrated that although the relationship between theta and PEA was mediated by PES, there was not a relationship between the ERN and PEA. Our data suggest that although the ERN and frontal midline theta index functionally related underlying cognitive processes, they are not simply the same process manifested in different domains. In addition, our findings are consistent with the adaptive theory of post-error slowing, as PES was positively associated with post-error accuracy at the single-trial level. More generally, our study provides additional support for the inclusion of a time-frequency approach to better understand the role of medial frontal cortex in action monitoring.Keywords ERN . Frontal midline theta . Action monitoring . Induced vs. evoked Within simple forced-choice decision-making tasks, committing an error initiates a cascade of cognitive events within the action-monitoring system. The participant will briefly disengage from the ongoing task, attend to and identify the error, and make cognitive and behavioral adjustments in an effort to prevent the error from reoccurring once they reengage in the task (Wessel, 2017;Wessel & Aron, 2017). In particular, these behavioral adjustments include increases in response time on trials that follow error commission (post-error slowing [PES]; Laming, 1979), as well as either increases or decreases in subsequent trial accuracy (post-error accuracy [PEA]). A major topic of debate in the research community is whether this slowing is an adaptive or maladaptive consequence of an error. Findings in support of adaptive theories suggest that PES provides additional time to process subsequent trial task stimuli, consequently enabling a relative improvement in task performance (increased PEA; Botvinick, Braver, Barch, Carter,