Early error detection is generic, but subsequent adaption to errors is not: evidence from ERPs.
Monica Dhar1, Gilles Pourtois1
1Department of Experimental Clinical, and Health Psychology, Ghent University, Henri Dunantlaan 2, 9000 Gent, Belgium.
Neuropsychologia
|January 12, 2011
Summary
Pre-familiarization with stimulus features does not affect error detection (ERN/Pe) but influences post-error adaptation. This suggests error detection is generic, while adaptive processes are malleable.
Area of Science:
- Cognitive Neuroscience
- Electrophysiology
- Human Psychology
Background:
- Error detection and post-error adaptation are crucial for learning and performance.
- The influence of stimulus familiarity on these cognitive control processes remains unclear.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate if pre-familiarization with task-relevant stimulus features impacts error detection and post-error regulatory processes.
- To determine if familiarity affects the neural correlates of error processing using electroencephalography (EEG).
Main Methods:
- 19 healthy adults performed a speeded Go/NoGo task with compound targets.
- Stimulus attributes were either pre-familiarised or not.
- High-density EEG was recorded during task performance.
Main Results:
- Error-related negativity (ERN) and error positivity (Pe) were elicited by errors but not modulated by familiarisation.
- Distinct topographic event-related potential (ERP) effects were observed for familiarised versus non-familiarised stimuli post-error.
- Post-error slowing was abolished when stimuli attributes were familiarised.
Conclusions:
- Pre-familiarisation does not alter basic error detection mechanisms (ERN/Pe).
- Subsequent adaptive processes following errors are influenced by stimulus familiarity.
- Error detection mechanisms appear generic, while automatic adaptive processes are malleable and sensitive to feature pre-familiarisation.
Related Concept Videos
01:12Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization
Error is the deviation of the obtained result from the true, expected value or the estimated central value. Errors are expressed in absolute or relative terms.
Absolute error in a measurement is the numerical difference from the true or central value. Relative error is the ratio between absolute error and the true or central value, expressed as a percentage.
Errors can be classified by source, magnitude, and sign. There are three types of errors: systematic, random, and gross.
Systematic or...
Absolute error in a measurement is the numerical difference from the true or central value. Relative error is the ratio between absolute error and the true or central value, expressed as a percentage.
Errors can be classified by source, magnitude, and sign. There are three types of errors: systematic, random, and gross.
Systematic or...
01:15Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors
In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
01:20Random and Systematic Errors
Scientists always try their best to record measurements with the utmost accuracy and precision. However, sometimes errors do occur. These errors can be random or systematic. Random errors are observed due to the inconsistency or fluctuation in the measurement process, or variations in the quantity itself that is being measured. Such errors fluctuate from being greater than or less than the true value in repeated measurements. Consider a scientist measuring the length of an earthworm using a...
01:20Random and Systematic Errors
Scientists always try their best to record measurements with the utmost accuracy and precision. However, sometimes errors do occur. These errors can be random or systematic. Random errors are observed due to the inconsistency or fluctuation in the measurement process, or variations in the quantity itself that is being measured. Such errors fluctuate from being greater than or less than the true value in repeated measurements. Consider a scientist measuring the length of an earthworm using a...
03:37Uncertainty in Measurement: Accuracy and Precision
Scientists typically make repeated measurements of a quantity to ensure the quality of their findings and to evaluate both the precision and the accuracy of their results. Measurements are said to be precise if they yield very similar results when repeated in the same manner. A measurement is considered accurate if it yields a result that is very close to the true or the accepted value. Precise values agree with each other; accurate values agree with a true value.
01:04Random Error
Random or indeterminate errors originate from various uncontrollable variables, such as variations in environmental conditions, instrument imperfections, or the inherent variability of the phenomena being measured. Usually, these errors cannot be predicted, estimated, or characterized because their direction and magnitude often vary in magnitude and direction even during consecutive measurements. As a result, they are difficult to eliminate. However, the aggregate effect of these errors can be...