There is growing interest in the field of human-computer interaction in the use of mouse movement data to infer e.g. user's interests, preferences and personality. Previous work has defined various patterns of mouse movement behavior. However, there is a paucity of mouse tracking measures and defined movement patterns for use in the specific context of data collection with online surveys. The present study aimed to define and visualize patterns of mouse movements while the user provided responses in a survey (with questions to be answered using a 5-point Likert response scale). The study produced a wide range of different patterns, including new patterns, and showed that these can easily be distinguished. The identified patterns may -in conjunction with machine learning algorithms -be used for further investigation toward e.g. the recognition of the user's state of mind or for user studies.
Error monitoring is the metacognitive process by which we are able to detect and signal our errors once a response has been made. Monitoring when the outcome of our actions deviates from the intended goal is crucial for behavior, learning, and the development of higher-order social skills. Here, we explored the neuronal substrates of error monitoring during the integration of facial expression cues using electroencephalography (EEG). Our goal was to investigate the signatures of error monitoring before and after a response execution dependent on the integration of facial cues. We followed the hypothesis of midfrontal theta as a robust neuronal marker of error monitoring since it has been consistently described as a mechanism to signal the need for cognitive control. Also, we hypothesized that EEG frequency-domain components might bring advantage to study error monitoring in complex scenarios as it carries information from locked and non-phase-locked signals. A challenging go/no-go saccadic paradigm was applied to elicit errors: integration of facial emotional signals and gaze direction was required to solve it. EEG data were acquired from twenty healthy participants and analyzed at the level of theta band activity during response preparation and execution. Although theta modulation has been consistently demonstrated during error monitoring, it is still unclear how early it starts to occur. We found theta power differences at midfrontal channels between correct and error trials. Theta was higher immediately after erroneous responses. Moreover, before response initiation we observed the opposite: lower theta preceding errors. These results suggest theta band activity not only as an index of error monitoring, which is needed to enhance cognitive control, but also as a requisite for success. This study adds to previous evidence for the role of theta band in error monitoring processes by revealing error-related patterns even before response execution in complex tasks, and using a paradigm requiring the integration of facial expression cues.
Error-related electroencephalographic (EEG) signals have been widely studied concerning the human cognitive capability of differentiating between erroneous and correct actions. Midfrontal error-related negativity (ERN) and theta band oscillations are believed to underlie post-action error monitoring. However, it remains elusive how early monitoring activity is trackable and what are the pre-response brain mechanisms related to performance monitoring. Moreover, it is still unclear how task-specific parameters, such as cognitive demand or motor control, influence these processes. Here, we aimed to test pre- and post-error EEG patterns for different types of motor responses and investigate the neuronal mechanisms leading to erroneous actions. We implemented a go/no-go paradigm based on keypresses and saccades. Participants received an initial instruction about the direction of response to be given based on a facial cue and a subsequent one about the type of action to be performed based on an object cue. The paradigm was tested in 20 healthy volunteers combining EEG and eye tracking. We found significant differences in reaction time, number, and type of errors between the two actions. Saccadic responses reflected a higher number of premature responses and errors compared to the keypress ones. Nevertheless, both led to similar EEG patterns, supporting previous evidence for increased ERN amplitude and midfrontal theta power during error commission. Moreover, we found pre-error decreased theta activity independent of the type of action. Source analysis suggested different origin for such pre- and post-error neuronal patterns, matching the anterior insular cortex and the anterior cingulate cortex, respectively. This opposite pattern supports previous evidence of midfrontal theta not only as a neuronal marker of error commission but also as a predictor of action performance. Midfrontal theta, mostly associated with alert mechanisms triggering behavioral adjustments, also seems to reflect pre-response attentional mechanisms independently of the action to be performed. Our findings also add to the discussion regarding how salience network nodes interact during performance monitoring by suggesting that pre- and post-error patterns have different neuronal sources within this network.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.