Error negativity on correct trials: a reexamination of available data

Vidal, Franck; Burle, Borı́s; Bonnet, Michel; Grapperon, Jacques; Hasbroucq, Thierry

doi:10.1016/s0301-0511(03)00097-8

Cited by 154 publications

(134 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

121

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Insofar as the ERN is an index of ACC engagement, these data suggest that the ACC may become more engaged when processing more significant errors. Although the CRN may reflect similar ACC activity (Ridderinkhof et al, 2004;Vidal et al, 2000Vidal et al, , 2003, the present data suggest that the ACC is not more engaged in response monitoring during more significant correct trials. In this way, the present data suggest some functional differentiation between the CRN and ERN in terms of response monitoring.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 45%

“…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 components may index response monitoring processes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On the ERN and the significance of errors

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 45%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

On the ERN and the significance of errors

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Note that a relatively large CRN was observed in response to hits in this study. This amplification of the CRN is likely to be due to the nature of the speeded task used here, more specifically to the prompt response deadline (Gehring et al, 1993;Luu et al, 2000;Pailing & Segalowitz, 2004;Vidal, Burle, Bonnet, Grapperon, & Hasbroucq, 2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early error detection is generic, but subsequent adaption to errors is not: Evidence from ERPs

Dhar

2011

Neuropsychologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the present study was to investigate whether error detection and subsequent regulatory processes could be influenced by pre-familiarisation with task-relevant stimulus features. To this end, nineteen healthy adults performed a speeded Go/NoGo task with compound targets, involving two concurrent stimulus attributes, which were either prefamiliarised or not, while high-density EEG was recorded. During the speeded Go/NoGo task, response errors clearly elicited an error-related negativity (ERN) and error positivity (Pe), but these error-related components were not modulated by familiarisation. By comparison, post-error adaptive processes were found to depend on familiarisation, as distinct topographic ERP effects were evidenced for familiarised vs. non-familiarised stimuli. Moreover, post-error slowing was abolished in the condition comprising familiarised attributes. These results suggest that prefamiliarisation with a stimulus property leaves unaffected error detection mechanisms, while altering subsequent adaptive processes. Whereas error detection mechanisms may be generic, the automatic adaptive processes consecutive to error detection may be malleable, and influenced by pre-familiarisation of stimulus features.

show abstract

“…The automatic artifact rejection excluded all trials with amplitudes above/below ±150 μV. To prevent an overlap of simultaneous activity of contiguous electrodes, current-source density (CSD; Perrin, Pernier, Bertrand, & Echallier, 1989) transformations were implemented (e.g., Gibbons et al, 2011;Vidal, Burle, Bonnet, Grapperon, & Hasbroucq, 2003;Vidal, Hasbroucq, Grapperon, & Bonnet, 2000). The order of the splines was 4, the maximal degree of the Legendre polynomial was 10, and the λ regularization value was 1.000000e−005.…”

Section: Electrophysiological Recordingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How personal standards perfectionism and evaluative concerns perfectionism affect the error positivity and post-error behavior with varying stimulus visibility

Drizinsky

Zülch

Gibbons

et al. 2016

Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Error detection is required in order to correct or avoid imperfect behavior. Although error detection is beneficial for some people, for others it might be disturbing. We investigated Gaudreau and Thompson's (Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 532−537, 2010) model, which combines personal standards perfectionism (PSP) and evaluative concerns perfectionism (ECP). In our electrophysiological study, 43 participants performed a combination of a modified Simon task, an error awareness paradigm, and a masking task with a variation of stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA; 33, 67, and 100 ms). Interestingly, relative to low-ECP participants, high-ECP participants showed a better post-error accuracy (despite a worse classification accuracy) in the highvisibility SOA 100 condition than in the two low-visibility conditions (SOA 33 and SOA 67). Regarding the electrophysiological results, first, we found a positive correlation between ECP and the amplitude of the error positivity (Pe) under conditions of low stimulus visibility. Second, under the condition of high stimulus visibility, we observed a higher Pe amplitude for high-ECP-low-PSP participants than for high-ECP-high-PSP participants. These findings are discussed within the framework of the error-processing avoidance hypothesis of perfectionism (Stahl, Acharki, Kresimon, Völler, & Gibbons, International Journal of Psychophysiology, 97, 153-162, 2015).

show abstract

Error negativity on correct trials: a reexamination of available data

Cited by 154 publications

References 27 publications

On the ERN and the significance of errors

On the ERN and the significance of errors

Early error detection is generic, but subsequent adaption to errors is not: Evidence from ERPs

How personal standards perfectionism and evaluative concerns perfectionism affect the error positivity and post-error behavior with varying stimulus visibility

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About