Elizabeth A Martin1, Amanda McCleery2, Melody M Moore3, Jonathan K Wynn2, Michael F Green2, William P Horan2. 1. Department of Psychological Science, University of California, Irvine, United States of America. Electronic address: emartin8@uci.edu. 2. VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, United States of America; Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, United States of America. 3. Department of Psychological Science, University of California, Irvine, United States of America.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although individuals with, or at risk for, psychotic disorders often show difficulties with performance monitoring and feedback processing, findings from studies using event-related potentials (ERPs) to index these processes are not consistent. This meta-analytic review focused on studies of two different indexes of performance monitoring, the early error-related negativity (ERN; n = 25) and the later error positivity (Pe; n = 17), and one index of feedback processing, the feedback negativity (FN; n = 6). METHODS: We evaluated whether individuals (1) with psychotic disorders, or (2) at heightened risk for these disorders differ from healthy controls in available studies of the ERN, Pe, and FN. RESULTS: There was a significant, large ERN reduction in those with psychosis (g = -0.96) compared to controls, and a significant, moderate ERN reduction in those at-risk (g = -0.48). In contrast, there were uniformly non-significant, small between-group differences for Pe and FN (gs ≤ |0.16|). CONCLUSIONS: The results reveal a differential pattern of impairment in psychosis. Early performance monitoring (ERN) impairments are substantial among those with psychotic disorders in general and may be a useful vulnerability indicator for these disorders. However, later performance monitoring (Pe) and basic feedback processing (FN) appear to be relatively spared in psychosis.
BACKGROUND: Although individuals with, or at risk for, psychotic disorders often show difficulties with performance monitoring and feedback processing, findings from studies using event-related potentials (ERPs) to index these processes are not consistent. This meta-analytic review focused on studies of two different indexes of performance monitoring, the early error-related negativity (ERN; n = 25) and the later error positivity (Pe; n = 17), and one index of feedback processing, the feedback negativity (FN; n = 6). METHODS: We evaluated whether individuals (1) with psychotic disorders, or (2) at heightened risk for these disorders differ from healthy controls in available studies of the ERN, Pe, and FN. RESULTS: There was a significant, large ERN reduction in those with psychosis (g = -0.96) compared to controls, and a significant, moderate ERN reduction in those at-risk (g = -0.48). In contrast, there were uniformly non-significant, small between-group differences for Pe and FN (gs ≤ |0.16|). CONCLUSIONS: The results reveal a differential pattern of impairment in psychosis. Early performance monitoring (ERN) impairments are substantial among those with psychotic disorders in general and may be a useful vulnerability indicator for these disorders. However, later performance monitoring (Pe) and basic feedback processing (FN) appear to be relatively spared in psychosis.
Authors: Molly Simmonite; Alan T Bates; Madeleine J Groom; Georgina M Jackson; Chris Hollis; Peter F Liddle Journal: Int J Psychophysiol Date: 2012-01-25 Impact factor: 2.997
Authors: Kristin R Laurens; Sheilagh Hodgins; Glenn L Mould; Sophie A West; Poppy L A Schoenberg; Robin M Murray; Eric A Taylor Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2009-09-18 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Tsuyoshi Araki; Margaret Niznikiewicz; Toshiro Kawashima; Paul G Nestor; Martha E Shenton; Robert W McCarley Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2013-03-16 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Jeffrey S Bedwell; Geoffrey F Potts; Diane C Gooding; Benjamin J Trachik; Chi C Chan; Christopher C Spencer Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-06-14 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Roman Kotov; Katherine G Jonas; William T Carpenter; Michael N Dretsch; Nicholas R Eaton; Miriam K Forbes; Kelsie T Forbush; Kelsey Hobbs; Ulrich Reininghaus; Tim Slade; Susan C South; Matthew Sunderland; Monika A Waszczuk; Thomas A Widiger; Aidan G C Wright; David H Zald; Robert F Krueger; David Watson Journal: World Psychiatry Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 49.548
Authors: Peter E Clayson; Jonathan K Wynn; Zachary P Infantolino; Greg Hajcak; Michael F Green; William P Horan Journal: J Abnorm Psychol Date: 2019-11
Authors: Anja Riesel; Julia Klawohn; Rosa Grützmann; Christian Kaufmann; Stephan Heinzel; Katharina Bey; Leonhard Lennertz; Michael Wagner; Norbert Kathmann Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2019-02-12 Impact factor: 7.723