Subthreshold error corrections predict adaptive post‐error compensations

Beatty, Paul J.; Buzzell, George A.; Roberts, Daniel M.; Voloshyna, Yelyzaveta; McDonald, Craig G.

doi:10.1111/psyp.13803

Cited by 14 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, electromyography (EMG) recorded even during a choice reaction-time task has also found some degree of subthreshold corrective process. Using a color Simon task, Beatty et al (2021) found that even when an overt correction was not made in response to an error, participants exhibited subthreshold corrective activity which interestingly, predicted post-error performance (i.e., compensatory behavior such as speeding or slowing) on subsequent trials. Similarly, as already discussed, some studies have found evidence of "partial" errors (e.g., Burle et al, 2008;Allain et al, 2009;Cohen and van Gaal, 2014;Ficarella et al, 2019), with some also finding a relationship between these partial errors and post-error behavior (Allain et al, 2009;Ficarella et al, 2019).…”

Section: Consideration Of Errors That Are Not Two-choice Button Pressesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Updating the relationship of the Ne/ERN to task-related behavior: A brief review and suggestions for future research

LoTemplio

Lopes

McDonnell

et al. 2023

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The error negativity/error-related negativity (Ne/ERN) is one of the most well-studied event-related potential (ERP) components in the electroencephalography (EEG) literature. Peaking about 50 ms after the commission of an error, the Ne/ERN is a negative deflection in the ERP waveform that is thought to reflect error processing in the brain. While its relationships to trait constructs such as anxiety are well-documented, there is still little known about how the Ne/ERN may subsequently influence task-related behavior. In other words, does the occurrence of the Ne/ERN trigger any sort of error corrective process, or any other behavioral adaptation to avoid errors? Several theories have emerged to explain how the Ne/ERN may implement or affect behavior on a task, but evidence supporting each has been mixed. In the following manuscript, we review these theories, and then systematically discuss the reasons that there may be discrepancies in the literature. We review both the inherent biological factors of the neural regions that underlie error-processing in the brain, and some of the researcher-induced factors in analytic and experimental choices that may be exacerbating these discrepancies. We end with a table of recommendations for future researchers who aim to understand the relationship between the Ne/ERN and behavior.

show abstract

Section: Consideration Of Errors That Are Not Two-choice Button Pressesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Updating the relationship of the Ne/ERN to task-related behavior: A brief review and suggestions for future research

LoTemplio

Lopes

McDonnell

et al. 2023

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Accordingly, error cancellation should already emerge before or during the deflection of the error-related negativity (ERN), which is at odds with the interpretation of the ERN as reflecting the earliest time point of error processing [10,11]. Early error cancellation, however, complements findings on early preparation of error-correction responses that have been reported for manual actions [17,38,39] and visual search behaviour alike [40]. 3 Conflict between the execution and the cancellation of an erroneous response (here: pressing versus releasing a key) might instead contribute to the ERN.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Error cancellation

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The human cognitive system houses efficient mechanisms to monitor ongoing actions. Upon detecting an erroneous course of action, these mechanisms are commonly assumed to adjust cognitive processing to mitigate the error's consequences and to prevent future action slips. Here, we demonstrate that error detection has far earlier consequences by feeding back directly onto ongoing motor activity, thus cancelling erroneous movements immediately. We tested this prediction of immediate auto-correction by analysing how the force of correct and erroneous keypress actions evolves over time while controlling for cognitive and biomechanical constraints relating to response time and the peak force of a movement. We conclude that the force profiles are indicative of active cancellation by showing indications of shorter response durations for errors already within the first 100 ms, i.e. between the onset and the peak of the response, a timescale that has previously been related solely to error detection. This effect increased in a late phase of responding, i.e. after response force peaked until its offset, further corroborating that it indeed reflects cancellation efforts instead of consequences of planning or initiating the error.

show abstract

“…We subtracted the trial-average activity in the time domain from the EEG activity of every single trial, thus effectively removing any phase-locked component, so we could be certain that the resulting oscillatory activity was nonphase-locked, which was not contaminated by ERPs. This method was also widely used in recent EEG studies [ 73 , 74 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Suppression of distracting inputs by visual-spatial cues is driven by anticipatory alpha activity

Zhao

Kong

et al. 2023

PLoS Biol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A growing body of research demonstrates that distracting inputs can be proactively suppressed via spatial cues, nonspatial cues, or experience, which are governed by more than one top-down mechanism of attention. However, how the neural mechanisms underlying spatial distractor cues guide proactive suppression of distracting inputs remains unresolved. Here, we recorded electroencephalography signals from 110 participants in 3 experiments to identify the role of alpha activity in proactive distractor suppression induced by spatial cues and its influence on subsequent distractor inhibition. Behaviorally, we found novel changes in the spatial proximity of the distractor: Cueing distractors far away from the target improves search performance for the target, while cueing distractors close to the target hampers performance. Crucially, we found dynamic characteristics of spatial representation for distractor suppression during anticipation. This result was further verified by alpha power increased relatively contralateral to the cued distractor. At both the between- and within-subjects levels, we found that these activities further predicted the decrement of the subsequent PD component, which was indicative of reduced distractor interference. Moreover, anticipatory alpha activity and its link with the subsequent PD component were specific to the high predictive validity of distractor cue. Together, our results reveal the underlying neural mechanisms by which cueing the spatial distractor may contribute to reduced distractor interference. These results also provide evidence supporting the role of alpha activity as gating by proactive suppression.

show abstract

Subthreshold error corrections predict adaptive post‐error compensations

Cited by 14 publications

References 64 publications

Updating the relationship of the Ne/ERN to task-related behavior: A brief review and suggestions for future research

Updating the relationship of the Ne/ERN to task-related behavior: A brief review and suggestions for future research

Error cancellation

Suppression of distracting inputs by visual-spatial cues is driven by anticipatory alpha activity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About