No abstract

The reinforcement learning theory suggests that the feedback negativity should be larger when feedback is unexpected. Two recent studies found, however, that the feedback negativity was unaffected by outcome probability. To further examine this issue, participants in the present studies made reward predictions on each trial of a gambling task where objective reward probability was indicated by a cue. In Study 1, participants made reward predictions following the cue, but prior to their gambling choice; in Study 2, predictions were made following their gambling choice. Predicted and unpredicted outcomes were associated with equivalent feedback negativities in Study 1. In Study 2, however, the feedback negativity was larger for unpredicted outcomes. These data suggest that the magnitude of the feedback negativity is sensitive to violations of reward prediction, but that this effect may depend on the close coupling of prediction and outcome.

Research involving event-related brain potentials has revealed that anxiety is associated with enhanced error monitoring, as reflected in increased amplitude of the error-related negativity (ERN). The nature of the relationship between anxiety and error monitoring is unclear, however. Through meta-analysis and a critical review of the literature, we argue that anxious apprehension/worry is the dimension of anxiety most closely associated with error monitoring. Although, overall, anxiety demonstrated a robust, “small-to-medium” relationship with enhanced ERN (r = −0.25), studies employing measures of anxious apprehension show a threefold greater effect size estimate (r = −0.35) than those utilizing other measures of anxiety (r = −0.09). Our conceptual framework helps explain this more specific relationship between anxiety and enhanced ERN and delineates the unique roles of worry, conflict processing, and modes of cognitive control. Collectively, our analysis suggests that enhanced ERN in anxiety results from the interplay of a decrease in processes supporting active goal maintenance and a compensatory increase in processes dedicated to transient reactivation of task goals on an as-needed basis when salient events (i.e., errors) occur.

The error-related negativity (ERN) is an event-related brain potential observed when subjects commit errors. To examine whether the ERN is sensitive to the value of errors, the motivational significance of errors was manipulated in two experiments. In Experiment 1, low and high monetary value errors were compared to evaluate the effect of trial value on the ERN. In Experiment 2, subjects performed a flanker task both while their performance was being evaluated and during a control condition. Consistent with the notion that the error-detection system is sensitive to the significance of errors, the ERN was significantly larger on high-value trials in Experiment 1 and during evaluation in Experiment 2. There were no corresponding effects on the correct response negativity, and no behavioral differences between conditions were evident in either experiment. These results are discussed in terms of the functional role of the ERN in response monitoring.Descriptors: Motivation, Event-related potentials (ERPs), Error-related negativity (ERN), Ne, Value, Affect Effective action monitoring involves appropriate performance adjustments in terms of task demands, and a crucial component of this process is the ability to detect errors and adjust performance accordingly (Falkenstein, Hoormann, Christ, & Hohnsbein, 2000). Studies that measure response-locked eventrelated brain potentials (ERPs) have described fronto-centrally maximal negative components that appear relevant to response monitoring. Perhaps most notably, when subjects make a mistake, the response-locked ERP at fronto-central recording sites is characterized by a negative deflection known as the error-related negativity (ERN or Ne) that peaks approximately 50 ms postresponse (Falkenstein et al., 2000;Falkenstein, Hohnsbein, Hoormann, & Blanke, 1991;Gehring, Coles, Meyer, & Donchin, 1990; Gerhing, Goss, Coles, Meyer, & Donchin, 1993;Holroyd & Coles, 2002;Nieuwenhuis, Ridderinkhof, Blom, Band, & Kok, 2001).Because the ERN has been observed across different stimulus and response modalities, it is thought to reflect the activity of a generic response monitoring system (Bernstein, Scheffers, & Coles, 1995;Dehaene, Posner, & Tucker, 1994;Falkenstein et al., 1991Falkenstein et al., , 2000Holroyd, Dien, & Coles, 1998;Luu, Flaisch, & Tucker, 2000;Miltner, Braun, & Coles, 1997;Van 't Ent & Apkarian, 1999). Studies utilizing source localization suggest that the ERN is generated in the medial frontal cortex, most likely the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC; Dehaene et al., 1994;Holroyd et al., 1998;Miltner et al., 1997).In addition to the ERN, a small negative deflection has also been observed in the response-locked ERP on correct trials. This correct response negativity (CRN) appears to have morphological and topographical properties similar to the ERN (Vidal, Burle, Bonnet, Grapperon, & Hasbroucq, 2003;Vidal, Hasbroucq, Grapperon, & Bonnet, 2000). Although the functional significance of the CRN is unknown, the similarities between the ERN and CRN suggest that both compon...

The error-related negativity (ERN) is an event-related brain potential observed when subjects receive feedback indicating errors or monetary losses. Evidence suggests that the ERN is larger for unexpected negative feedback. The P300 has also been shown to be enhanced for unexpected feedback, but does not appear to be sensitive to feedback valence. The present study evaluated the role of expectations on the ERN and P300 in two experiments that manipulated the probability of negative feedback (25%, 50%, or 75%) on a trial-by-trial basis in experiment 1, and by varying the frequency of positive and negative feedback across blocks of trials in experiment 2. In both experiments, P300 amplitude was larger for unexpected feedback; however, the ERN was equally large for expected and unexpected negative feedback. These results are discussed in terms of the potential role of expectations in processing errors and negative feedback.

Intentionally altering responses to unpleasant stimuli affects physiological and hemodynamic activity associated with emotional and cognitive processing. In the present experiment, we measured the late-positive potential (LPP) of the visually evoked event-related brain potential to examine the effects of intentional emotion modulation on electrophysiological correlates of emotional and cognitive processing. Seventeen participants received instructions to view, suppress, and enhance emotional responses to unpleasant stimuli. Results revealed significantly decreased electrophysiological activity during suppression of emotional responses beginning around 250 ms poststimulus and lasting several hundred milliseconds. These data suggest that ERPs are sensitive to emotion modulation/regulation processes.

Does the language people use to refer to the self during introspection influence how they think, feel, and behave under social stress? If so, do these effects extend to socially anxious people who are particularly vulnerable to such stress? Seven studies explored these questions (total N ϭ 585). Studies 1a and 1b were proof-of-principle studies. They demonstrated that using non-first-person pronouns and one's own name (rather than first-person pronouns) during introspection enhances self-distancing. Studies 2 and 3 examined the implications of these different types of self-talk for regulating stress surrounding making good first impressions (Study 2) and public speaking (Study 3). Compared with the first-person group, the non-first-person group performed better according to objective raters in both studies. They also displayed less distress (Studies 2 and 3) and engaged in less maladaptive postevent processing (Study 3). Studies 4 and 5 examined how these different forms of self-talk influence the way people appraise social-anxiety-provoking events. They demonstrated that non-first-person language use (compared with first-person language use) leads people to appraise future stressors in more challenging and less threatening terms. Finally, a meta-analysis (Study 6) indicated that none of these findings were moderated by trait social anxiety, highlighting their translational potential. Together, these findings demonstrate that small shifts in the language people use to refer to the self during introspection consequentially influence their ability to regulate their thoughts, feelings, and behavior under social stress, even for vulnerable individuals.Keywords: distancing, stress, social anxiety, rumination, self-regulation, emotion regulation During the summer of 2010, LeBron James, a future Hall-ofFame basketball player, faced a tough decision. Should he stay with the small market team that nurtured his career from its inception, or move to a larger city market? Shortly after making his choice (he joined the larger market team), he described his decision-making process in an interview noting, "One thing I didn't want to do was make an emotional decision. I wanted to do what's best for LeBron James and to do what makes LeBron James happy" (Greenberg, 2010).Notice how James begins by referring to himself using the pronoun I, but then quickly switches to using his own name after indicating that he does not want to make an emotional decision. Does this shift from I to James represent a mere quirk of speech? Or could it represent something more-a process, for example, that consequentially influences people's capacity to control their thoughts, feelings, and behavior? Here we suggest that it is the latter. Specifically, we hypothesize that using one's own name and other non-first-person pronouns to refer to the self during introspection is a form of self-distancing that enhances self-regulation. 1 Harnessing Language to Promote Self-RegulationSeveral lines of research motivate this prediction. First, converging evidence...

We examined event-related brain potential (ERP) modulations during the anticipation and processing of unpleasant pictures under instructions to cognitively decrease and increase negative emotion. Instructions to decrease and increase negative emotion modulated the ERP response to unpleasant pictures in the direction of emotional intensity beginning around 400 ms and lasting several seconds. Decrease, but not increase, instructions also elicited enhanced frontal negativity associated with orienting and preparation prior to unpleasant picture onset. Last, ERP modulation by unpleasant pictures began around 300 ms, just prior to regulation effects, suggesting that appraisal of emotion occurs before emotion regulation. Together, the current findings underscore the utility of ERPs in illuminating the time course of emotion modulation and regulation that may help to refine extant theoretical models.