Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 4, 2026

Errors as a Means of Reducing Impulsive Food Choice
Published on: June 5, 2016
Sensitivity to punishment and reward omission: evidence from error-related ERP components
Maarten A S Boksem1, Mattie Tops, Evelien Kostermans
1Department of Social Psychology, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands. maarten@boksem.nl
Abstract:
In a recent experiment [Boksem, M.A.S., Tops, M., Wester, A.E., Meijman, T.F., Lorist, M.M., 2006. Error-related ERP components and individual differences in punishment and reward sensitivity. Brain Research 1101, 92-101], we showed that error-related ERP components were related to punishment and reward sensitivity. The present study was conducted to further evaluate the relationship between punishment/reward sensitivity and these ERP components. Therefore, we scored our subjects on the BIS/BAS measures of punishment and reward sensitivity. Then, subjects performed one of two versions of a Flanker task: in one, they were financially punished for committing errors; in the other, they were financially rewarded for correct performance. Analyses of ERN/Ne amplitudes indicated significant interactions between personality measures of punishment (BIS) and reward (BAS) and actual punishment and reward, while analyses of Pe amplitudes showed significant interactions between personality measures of reward sensitivity and actual reward. We suggest that ERN/Ne amplitude is related to concerns over mistakes and depends on the level of aversion experienced by individual subjects for making these mistakes. Subjects that are highly sensitive to punishment are strongly motivated or engaged in avoiding punishment, while subjects sensitive to rewards are motivated to obtain rewards and therefore show high task engagement when rewards may be earned. The error-related ERP components appear to track this level of engagement in task performance.
More Related Videos
08:26Event-related Potentials During Target-response Tasks to Study Cognitive Processes of Upper Limb Use in Children with Unilateral Cerebral Palsy
Published on: January 11, 2016
05:22Dissociation of the Confounding Influences of Expectancy and Integrative Difficulty Residing in Anomalous Sentences in Event-related Potential Studies
Published on: May 9, 2019
Related Concept Videos
Operant Conditioning
Reinforcement in operant conditioning can be positive or negative, both of which serve to increase the likelihood of a behavior. Positive...
Punishment
Punishment can be positive or negative. Positive punishment involves adding an undesirable stimulus, such as scolding, to decrease a behavior. Negative punishment involves removing a desirable stimulus, such as taking away a favorite toy, to decrease behavior.
Timing and Consequences on Behavior
Humans, however, can respond to delayed reinforcers. We often make decisions between immediate small rewards and delayed larger rewards. This ability to delay gratification is a significant factor...
Law of Effect
Edward Thorndike's foundational work involved studying learning in animals, particularly using puzzle boxes...
Generalization, Discrimination, and Extinction
Generalization occurs when a behavior reinforced in one context is performed in similar situations. For instance, a student who studies diligently for calculus and receives excellent grades might apply the same study habits to psychology and history, expecting similar results. Generalization shows how learning in one setting can influence behavior in...
Behavior Modification
A real-world application of operant conditioning principles is applied...