Tracking the Temporal Dynamics of Updating Cognitive Control: An Examination of Error Processing

Abstract

In 2 experiments, we used event-related brain potentials (ERPs) to examine the temporal dynamics of neural processes related to adjustments of cognitive control following errors in the counting Stroop task. The ERPs elicited by errors revealed the error-related negativity (ERN) and error positivity consistent with a large body of literature. In addition, errors were associated with a frontal slow wave between 200 and 2000 ms after the response that was consistent with the activity of neural generators in the lateral frontal cortex. The ERN and frontal slow wave were correlated with posterror slowing of response time and positive affect (i.e., happiness and calmness) during task performance. These data are consistent with the idea that interactions between anterior cingulate cortex and lateral frontal cortex support adjustments of cognitive control and that this neural network is sensitive to the influence of affect experienced during task performance.

Outcome expectancy and not accuracy determines posterror slowing: ERP support

“…The results of the present study seem to be at odds with previous studies reporting posterror slowing predicted by the ERN (Debener et al, 2005;Gehring et al, 1993;MarcoPallares et al, 2008;West & Travers, 2008). It is possible that methodological differences across studies can explain part of the empirical differences.…”

“…On top of that, there are substantial task differences-inducing different errors-among studies. There are meaningful differences between errors in our four-choice color-discrimination task, on the one hand, and the intrusion errors in a Stroop task (West & Travers, 2008) and errors in a flanker task (Gehring et al, 1993;MarcoPallares et al, 2008), on the other hand. One potentially interesting difference is that errors in Stroop and flanker tasks are characterized by response conflict and therefore also trigger conflict adaptation mechanisms.…”

“…Although some studies have shown a correlation between the ERN and slowing (Debener et al, 2005;Gehring, Goss, Coles, Meyer, & Donchin, 1993;MarcoPallares et al, 2008;West & Travers, 2008; see also, for recent work in the time-frequency domain, Cavanagh, Cohen, & Allen, 2009), at least an equal number of studies reported no such relationship. Mathalon et al (2002), for instance, observed posterror slowing in the absence of an ERN in a group of schizophrenic patients (for similar data in Parkinson's patients, see Stemmer, Segalowitz, Dywan, Panisset, & Melmed, 2007), and a considerable number of studies have indicated that ERN is not associated with slowing after errors (Beste, Willemssen, Saft, & Falkenstein, 2009;Carp & Compton, 2009;Endrass, Reuter, & Kathmann, 2007;Hajcak et al, 2003;Nieuwenhuis, Ridderinkhof, Blow, Band, & Kok, 2001).…”

Absorbed in the task: Personality measures predict engagement during task performance as tracked by error negativity and asymmetrical frontal activity

“…We defined engagement as the overt or covert allocation or focusing of attentional resources. Consistent with engagement's determining ERN amplitude, a recent study showed that ERN amplitude was highest in individuals showing a happy mood state and low self-reported boredom at the beginning of the task and showed the largest decrease in a happy mood and the smallest increase in boredom during the task, suggesting in this case a positive relation to intrinsic motivation that is present only at the beginning of performance (West & Travers, 2008). Another motivator of task engagement may be concerns over so MacDonald, 2008;Segerstrom, 2005), which would increase persistence during prolonged task performance.…”

“…After the reward manipulation, ERN amplitude and left RFA increased, and RTs and error rates decreased. All the measures showed the largest changes from the first to the second 20-min interval of In addition, a less pronounced increase in state boredom during the task was associated with larger ERN amplitudes (West & Travers, 2008; see also Luu et al, 2000). Constraint shows strong negative correlations with trait susceptibility to boredom (especially the internal stimulation aspect; Culp, 2006), suggesting that this last association (between less pronounced increase in state boredom during the task and larger ERN amplitudes) may have reflected subjects who score high on constraint, who showed less of an increase in state boredom and a smaller decline during the task in ERN amplitudes.…”