Brain negativity as an indicator of predictive error processing: the contribution of visual action effect monitoring

Abstract

The error (related) negativity (Ne/ERN) is an event-related potential in the electroencephalogram (EEG) correlating with error processing. Its conditions of appearance before terminal external error information suggest that the Ne/ERN is indicative of predictive processes in the evaluation of errors. The aim of the present study was to specifically examine the Ne/ERN in a complex motor task and to particularly rule out other explaining sources of the Ne/ERN aside from error prediction processes. To this end, we focused on the dependency of the Ne/ERN on visual monitoring about the action outcome after movement termination but before result feedback (action effect monitoring). Participants performed a semi-virtual throwing task by using a manipulandum to throw a virtual ball displayed on a computer screen to hit a target object. Visual feedback about the ball flying to the target was masked to prevent action effect monitoring. Participants received a static feedback about the action outcome (850 ms) after each trial. We found a significant negative deflection in the average EEG curves of the error trials peaking at ~250 ms after ball release, i.e., before error feedback. Furthermore, this Ne/ERN signal did not depend on visual ball-flight monitoring after release. We conclude that the Ne/ERN has the potential to indicate error prediction in motor tasks and that it exists even in the absence of action effect monitoring. In this study, we are separating different kinds of possible contributors to an electroencephalogram (EEG) error correlate (Ne/ERN) in a throwing task. We tested the influence of action effect monitoring on the Ne/ERN amplitude in the EEG. We used a task that allows us to restrict movement correction and action effect monitoring and to control the onset of result feedback. We ascribe the Ne/ERN to predictive error processing where a conscious feeling of failure is not a prerequisite.

Valence‐dependent brain potentials of processing augmented feedback in learning a complex arm movement sequence

“…Although a small negative deflection was also found in trials with positive feedback, the amplitude following negative feedback was significantly larger than after positive feedback. These findings are generally consistent with those reported in previous studies on outcome evaluation in cognitive tasks (Holroyd & Coles, ; Miltner et al, ; Nieuwenhuis et al, ) as well as in motor tasks (Joch et al, , ). Joch et al used a virtual throwing task and found similar effect sizes for the FRN (2017: d = 1.09; 2018: d = 1.21; current experiment: d = 1.34 [calculated from ]).…”

“…A negative deflection after positive feedback, as evident in the current experiment, is not always reported (Joch et al, ; Pfabigan et al, ). With respect to a similar error‐related EEG component, the error‐related negativity (ERN; Falkenstein, Hohnsbein, Hoormann, & Blanke, , Gehring, Goss, Coles, David, & Donchin, ), Coles, Scheffers, and Holroyd () argue that the ERN is sometimes observed on correct trials as well because error processing also occurs in these trials.…”

“…Joch et al used a virtual throwing task and found similar effect sizes for the FRN (2017: d = 1.09; 2018: d = 1.21; current experiment: d = 1.34 [calculated from ]). Differences might result from differences in complexity (Joch et al, , : one element; current experiment: four elements) and/or varying success rates (Joch et al, :74%, SD = 14; current experiment: 52.0%, SD = 3.6). This suggests that expectancy might have an influence as well on the FRN amplitude, but it is nevertheless valence dependent.…”

“…Knowledge about these effects is valuable to shed light on the role of feedback valence in motor learning, especially with respect to motor automatization processes and the EPAC hypothesis (Agethen & Krause, ; Krause et al, ). There are studies investigating error‐related EEG signals in complex motor tasks and evidence found for a valence effect in the FRN (Grand et al, ; Joch, Hegele, Maurer, Müller, & Maurer, , ; Krigolson & Holroyd, ; Maurer, Maurer, & Müller, ; Vocat, Pourtois, & Vuilleumier, ). But, none of them explicitly examined FRN‐ and/or P300‐dependent behavioral adjustments after extrinsic (augmented) feedback in such tasks.…”

“…A big challenge to investigating complex movements is the increased risk for movement artifacts during EEG recordings (Thompson, Steffert, Ros, Leach, & Gruzelier, ). But, analyzing ERPs in processing of intrinsic feedback of complex arm movements has been successfully demonstrated (e.g., Joch et al, , ; Maurer et al, ). Joch et al were able to show valence‐dependent FRN for a virtual throwing task with one movement segment.…”