Literature DB >> 29053930

Social dimension and complexity differentially influence brain responses during feedback processing.

Daniela M Pfabigan1,2, Marianne Gittenberger1, Claus Lamm1.   

Abstract

Recent research emphasizes the importance of social factors during performance monitoring. Thus, the current study investigated the impact of social stimuli -such as communicative gestures- on feedback processing. Moreover, it addressed a shortcoming of previous studies, which failed to consider stimulus complexity as potential confounding factor. Twenty-four volunteers performed a time estimation task while their electroencephalogram was recorded. Either social complex, social non-complex, non-social complex, or non-social non-complex stimuli were used to provide performance feedback. No effects of social dimension or complexity were found for task performance. In contrast, Feedback-Related Negativity (FRN) and P300 amplitudes were sensitive to both factors, with larger FRN and P300 amplitudes after social compared to non-social stimuli, and larger FRN amplitudes after complex positive than non-complex positive stimuli. P2 amplitudes were solely sensitive to feedback valence and social dimension. Subjectively, social complex stimuli were rated as more motivating than non-social complex ones. Independently of each other, social dimension and visual complexity influenced amplitude variation during performance monitoring. Social stimuli seem to be perceived as more salient, which is corroborated by P2, FRN and P300 results, as well as by subjective ratings. This could be explained due to their given relevance during every day social interactions.

Keywords:  FRN; P300; Performance monitoring; social stimuli; stimulus saliency

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29053930     DOI: 10.1080/17470919.2017.1395765

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Neurosci        ISSN: 1747-0919            Impact factor:   2.083


  7 in total

1.  Converging electrophysiological evidence for a processing advantage of social over nonsocial feedback.

Authors:  Daniela M Pfabigan; Shihui Han
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 3.282

2.  Multimodal mechanisms of human socially reinforced learning across neurodegenerative diseases.

Authors:  Agustina Legaz; Sofía Abrevaya; Martín Dottori; Cecilia González Campo; Agustina Birba; Miguel Martorell Caro; Julieta Aguirre; Andrea Slachevsky; Rafael Aranguiz; Cecilia Serrano; Claire M Gillan; Iracema Leroi; Adolfo M García; Sol Fittipaldi; Agustín Ibañez
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2022-04-29       Impact factor: 15.255

3.  Monetary Incentives Modulate Feedback-related Brain Activity.

Authors:  Shuting Mei; Qi Li; Xun Liu; Ya Zheng
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-08-09       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Emotional feedback ameliorates older adults' feedback-induced learning.

Authors:  Nicola K Ferdinand; Melanie Hilz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-30       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Keeping in time with social and non-social stimuli: Synchronisation with auditory, visual, and audio-visual cues.

Authors:  Juliane J Honisch; Prasannajeet Mane; Ofer Golan; Bhismadev Chakrabarti
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-04-22       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Racial Ingroup Bias and Efficiency Consideration Influence Distributive Decisions: A Dynamic Analysis of Time Domain and Time Frequency.

Authors:  Jiaxin Yu; Yan Wang; Jianling Yu; Jianmin Zeng
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2021-05-10       Impact factor: 4.677

7.  Internal control beliefs and reference frame concurrently impact early performance monitoring ERPs.

Authors:  Daniela M Pfabigan; Anna M Wucherer; Claus Lamm
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 3.282

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.