Response monitoring without sensory feedback

Allain, Sonia; Hasbroucq, Thierry; Burle, Borı́s; Grapperon, Jacques; Vidal, Franck

doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2004.04.013

Cited by 36 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous error-detection theories have extensive supporting evidence to indicate that error monitoring is an important function of the ACC, represented as the cortical generator of these control processes (Botvinick et al, 1999). It has also been suggested that this cortical generator coincides with a centroposterior cortical system to detect the external feedback by adopting an anticipated, predictive mode of control (Miltner et al, 1997;Allain et al, 2004;Nieuwenhuis et al, 2004).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Error monitoring functions in response to an external feedback when an explicit judgement is required

Balconi

Scioli

2012

International Journal of Psychophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Error monitoring functions in response to an external feedback when an explicit judgement is required

Balconi

Scioli

2012

International Journal of Psychophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Accordingly, future research is needed to clarify whether visual sensory feedback (in combination with IA) influences error awareness directly, or instead indirectly via some changes in proprioceptive inputs. The observation that a typical ERN can be elicited following errors in a completely deafferented patient (Allain, Hasbroucq, Burle, Grapperon, & Vidal, 2004) suggests however that proprioceptive information does not contribute directly to early error detection. Fifth, this study was confined to clarify effects of visual sensory feedback and interoception on error awareness and other potentially important factors, such as auditory sensory feedback, were therefore not considered in the present case.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Joint effects of sensory feedback and interoceptive awareness on conscious error detection: Evidence from event related brain potentials

Godefroid

Wiersema

2016

Biological Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Error awareness has been argued to depend on sensory feedback and interoceptive awareness (IA) (Ullsperger et al., 2010). We recorded EEG while participants performed a speeded Go/No-Go task in which they signaled error commission. Visibility of the effector was manipulated, while IA was measured with a heartbeat perception task. The late Pe was larger for aware than unaware errors. The ERN was also found to be modulated by error awareness, but only when the hand was visible, suggesting that its sensitivity to error awareness depends on the availability of visual sensory feedback. Only when the response hand was visible, the late Pe amplitude to aware errors correlated with IA, suggesting that sensory feedback and IA synergistically contribute to the emergence of error awareness. These findings underscore the idea that several sources of information accumulate in time following action execution in order to enable errors to break through and reach awareness.

show abstract

“…This suggests that the Ne reflects a response monitoring system, secondarily leading to error detection rather than error detection in itself. The early onset of this component, along with data collected on a completely deafferented patient (Allain, Hasbroucq, Burle, Grapperon, & Vidal, 2004), indicates that it is dissociated from sensory feedback.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

General-Purpose Monitoring during Speech Production

Riès

Janssen

Dufau

et al. 2011

Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of "monitoring" refers to our ability to control our actions on-line. Monitoring involved in speech production is often described in psycholinguistic models as an inherent part of the language system. We probed the specificity of speech monitoring in two psycholinguistic experiments where electroencephalographic activities were recorded. Our focus was on a component previously reported in nonlinguistic manual tasks and interpreted as a marker of monitoring processes. The error negativity (Ne, or error-related negativity), thought to originate in medial frontal areas, peaks shortly after erroneous responses. A component of seemingly comparable properties has been reported, after errors, in tasks requiring access to linguistic knowledge (e.g., speech production), compatible with a generic error-detection process. However, in contrast to its original name, advanced processing methods later revealed that this component is also present after correct responses in visuomotor tasks. Here, we reported the observation of the same negativity after correct responses across output modalities (manual and vocal responses). This indicates that, in language production too, the Ne reflects on-line response monitoring rather than error detection specifically. Furthermore, the temporal properties of the Ne suggest that this monitoring mechanism is engaged before any auditory feedback. The convergence of our findings with those obtained with nonlinguistic tasks suggests that at least part of the monitoring involved in speech production is subtended by a general-purpose mechanism.

show abstract

Response monitoring without sensory feedback

Cited by 36 publications

References 27 publications

Error monitoring functions in response to an external feedback when an explicit judgement is required

Error monitoring functions in response to an external feedback when an explicit judgement is required

Joint effects of sensory feedback and interoceptive awareness on conscious error detection: Evidence from event related brain potentials

General-Purpose Monitoring during Speech Production

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About