Adaptive goal-directed behavior involves monitoring of ongoing actions and performance outcomes, and subsequent adjustments of behavior and learning. We evaluate new findings in cognitive neuroscience concerning cortical interactions that subserve the recruitment and implementation of such cognitive control. A review of primate and human studies, along with a meta-analysis of the human functional neuroimaging literature, suggest that the detection of unfavorable outcomes, response errors, response conflict, and decision uncertainty elicits largely overlapping clusters of activation foci in an extensive part of the posterior medial frontal cortex (pMFC). A direct link is delineated between activity in this area and subsequent adjustments in performance. Emerging evidence points to functional interactions between the pMFC and the lateral prefrontal cortex (LPFC), so that monitoring-related pMFC activity serves as a signal that engages regulatory processes in the LPFC to implement performance adjustments.

Goal-directed behavior requires the continuous monitoring and dynamic adjustment of ongoing actions. Here, we report a direct coupling between the event-related electroencephalogram (EEG), functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), and behavioral measures of performance monitoring in humans. By applying independent component analysis to EEG signals recorded simultaneously with fMRI, we found the single-trial error-related negativity of the EEG to be systematically related to behavior in the subsequent trial, thereby reflecting immediate behavioral adjustments of a cognitive performance monitoring system. Moreover, this trial-by-trial EEG measure of performance monitoring predicted the fMRI activity in the rostral cingulate zone, a brain region thought to play a key role in processing of response errors. We conclude that investigations of the dynamic coupling between EEG and fMRI provide a powerful approach for the study of higher order brain functions.

No abstract

Successful goal-directed behavior requires not only correct action selection, planning, and execution but also the ability to flexibly adapt behavior when performance problems occur or the environment changes. A prerequisite for determining the necessity, type, and magnitude of adjustments is to continuously monitor the course and outcome of one's actions. Feedback-control loops correcting deviations from intended states constitute a basic functional principle of adaptation at all levels of the nervous system. Here, we review the neurophysiology of evaluating action course and outcome with respect to their valence, i.e., reward and punishment, and initiating short- and long-term adaptations, learning, and decisions. Based on studies in humans and other mammals, we outline the physiological principles of performance monitoring and subsequent cognitive, motivational, autonomic, and behavioral adaptation and link them to the underlying neuroanatomy, neurochemistry, psychological theories, and computational models. We provide an overview of invasive and noninvasive systemic measures, such as electrophysiological, neuroimaging, and lesion data. We describe how a wide network of brain areas encompassing frontal cortices, basal ganglia, thalamus, and monoaminergic brain stem nuclei detects and evaluates deviations of actual from predicted states indicating changed action costs or outcomes. This information is used to learn and update stimulus and action values, guide action selection, and recruit adaptive mechanisms that compensate errors and optimize goal achievement.

To detect erroneous action outcomes is necessary for flexible adjustments and therefore a prerequisite of adaptive, goal-directed behavior. While performance monitoring has been studied intensively over two decades and a vast amount of knowledge on its functional neuroanatomy has been gathered, much less is known about conscious error perception, often referred to as error awareness. Here, we review and discuss the conditions under which error awareness occurs, its neural correlates and underlying functional neuroanatomy. We focus specifically on the anterior insula, which has been shown to be (a) reliably activated during performance monitoring and (b) modulated by error awareness. Anterior insular activity appears to be closely related to autonomic responses associated with consciously perceived errors, although the causality and directions of these relationships still needs to be unraveled. We discuss the role of the anterior insula in generating versus perceiving autonomic responses and as a key player in balancing effortful task-related and resting-state activity. We suggest that errors elicit reactions highly reminiscent of an orienting response and may thus induce the autonomic arousal needed to recruit the required mental and physical resources. We discuss the role of norepinephrine activity in eliciting sufficiently strong central and autonomic nervous responses enabling the necessary adaptation as well as conscious error perception.

When our brain detects an error, this process changes how we react on ensuing trials. People show post-error adaptations, potentially to improve their performance in the near future. At least three types of behavioral post-error adjustments have been observed. These are post-error slowing (PES), post-error reduction of interference, and post-error improvement in accuracy (PIA). Apart from these behavioral changes, post-error adaptations have also been observed on a neuronal level with functional magnetic resonance imaging and electroencephalography. Neuronal post-error adaptations comprise activity increase in task-relevant brain areas, activity decrease in distracter-encoding brain areas, activity modulations in the motor system, and mid-frontal theta power increases. Here, we review the current literature with respect to these post-error adjustments, discuss under which circumstances these adjustments can be observed, and whether the different types of adjustments are linked to each other. We also evaluate different approaches for explaining the functional role of PES. In addition, we report reanalyzed and follow-up data from a flanker task and a moving dots interference task showing (1) that PES and PIA are not necessarily correlated, (2) that PES depends on the response–stimulus interval, and (3) that PES is reliable on a within-subject level over periods as long as several months.

Humans engaged in monotonous tasks are susceptible to occasional errors that may lead to serious consequences, but little is known about brain activity patterns preceding errors. Using functional MRI and applying independent component analysis followed by deconvolution of hemodynamic responses, we studied error preceding brain activity on a trial-by-trial basis. We found a set of brain regions in which the temporal evolution of activation predicted performance errors. These maladaptive brain activity changes started to evolve Ϸ30 sec before the error. In particular, a coincident decrease of deactivation in default mode regions of the brain, together with a decline of activation in regions associated with maintaining task effort, raised the probability of future errors. Our findings provide insights into the brain network dynamics preceding human performance errors and suggest that monitoring of the identified precursor states may help in avoiding human errors in critical real-world situations.deconvolution ͉ performance monitoring ͉ default mode ͉ frontal lobe H uman behavior may be strongly determined by the ongoing intrinsic dynamics of regional brain networks (1-3). Although it is conceivable that patterns of brain activity preceding action execution are causally responsible for the behavioral outcome, previous research of human performance monitoring typically focused on brain activity evoked by and occurring after behavioral errors and the ensuing adaptive compensatory mechanisms (4-6). It is not known yet how far ahead in time the state of cortical brain networks impacts on behavioral performance; some EEG and functional MRI (fMRI) evidence exists suggesting that activity in the preceding trial foreshadows subsequent errors but not earlier than that (7-10). The present study investigated this question by means of a single-trial analysis of event-related independent components (IC) in fMRI data during a visual task requiring rapid responses.We analyzed patterns of evoked brain activity across trials that preceded erroneous behavior and may thus be instrumental in causing errors. Errors in this simple repetitive forced-choice task in a controlled setting may principally have two mutually nonexclusive causes: One source of errors consists simply of random failures to implement the correct behavior, which may be generated by momentary fluctuations in neural activity during stimulus processing and response selection in a given trial (1, 11). Although it is possible to make predictions about adaptive behavior in trials succeeding an error, it would be largely impossible in this condition to anticipate future errors from current brain states. Another possibility is that a proportion of errors may be caused by a systematic maladjustment in cognitive control systems that develops more slowly over time, and which thus affords a prediction about future behavior, in particular the likelihood of an erroneous response from analyzing trends in the history of activity across trials. Models of cognitive control propose a p...

No abstract