Literature DB >> 35879098

Decoding the Specificity of Post-error Adjustments Using EEG-Based Multivariate Pattern Analysis.

Qing Li1, Jing Wang1, Zhifang Li1, Antao Chen2,3.   

Abstract

Errors can elicit post-error adjustments that serve to optimize performance by preventing further errors. An essential but unsolved issue is that whether post-error adjustments are domain-general or domain-specific, which was investigated in the present study through eliciting different types of errors. Behavioral and electrophysiological data were recorded when male and female subjects performed the Eriksen flanker task. For this study, we examined the aforementioned issue by combining event-related potential and multivariate pattern analysis. The results indicated that post-error slowing, error-related negativity, and error positivity were comparable between congruent and incongruent errors, indicating that errors triggered domain-general interference mechanisms. Whereas post-error accuracy and late positive potential elicited by incongruent errors were larger than those elicited by congruent errors, exhibiting domain-specific control adjustment mechanisms. Importantly, no successful decoding soon after errors was found between congruent and incongruent errors, but above-chance decoding was observed between these two types of errors with increasing time, which further support that domain-general adjustments occurred in the early stage, whereas domain-specific adjustments appeared in the late stage. Furthermore, brain-behavior correlation results suggested that the late post-error adjustments predicted subsequent behavior performance. Taken together, this study revealed that early domain-general interference adjustments induced by errors are reflected in error detection and error awareness, which are independent of error types; on the contrary, late domain-specific control adjustments are reflected in attentional adjustments, which are modulated by error types.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENTTo date, clear evidence on the specificity of post-error adjustments is lacking. The present study provides neurophysiological evidence that post-error adjustments simultaneously rely on both domain-general and domain-specific mechanisms. Event-related potential results indicated that domain-general adjustments were accompanied by the interference of error detection and error awareness. In contrast, domain-specific adjustments were associated with attentional adjustments. Multivariate pattern analysis further decoded the two features of post-error adjustments in the early stage matching the time patterns of error-related negativity and error positivity and in the late stage corresponding to the late positive potential. Temporal generalization analysis showed that domain-specific processing appeared stably in late post-error adjustments. Hence, we propose that post-error different stages may determine the specificity of post-error adjustments.
Copyright © 2022 the authors.

Entities:  

Year:  2022        PMID: 35879098      PMCID: PMC9436015          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0590-22.2022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.709


  32 in total

1.  A novel approach to the physiological measurement of mental workload.

Authors:  Matthew W Miller; Jeremy C Rietschel; Craig G McDonald; Bradley D Hatfield
Journal:  Int J Psychophysiol       Date:  2011-02-20       Impact factor: 2.997

2.  Error-Induced Blindness: Error Detection Leads to Impaired Sensory Processing and Lower Accuracy at Short Response-Stimulus Intervals.

Authors:  George A Buzzell; Paul J Beatty; Natalie A Paquette; Daniel M Roberts; Craig G McDonald
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2017-02-13       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Isolating component processes of posterror slowing with the psychological refractory period paradigm.

Authors:  Marco Steinhauser; Benjamin Ernst; Kevin W Ibald
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2016-10-06       Impact factor: 3.051

4.  Error-related brain potentials are differentially related to awareness of response errors: evidence from an antisaccade task.

Authors:  S Nieuwenhuis; K R Ridderinkhof; J Blom; G P Band; A Kok
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 4.016

5.  Decision processes in human performance monitoring.

Authors:  Marco Steinhauser; Nick Yeung
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2010-11-17       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Post-error adjustments.

Authors:  Claudia Danielmeier; Markus Ullsperger
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2011-09-15

7.  Decoding the influence of anticipatory states on visual perception in the presence of temporal distractors.

Authors:  Freek van Ede; Sammi R Chekroud; Mark G Stokes; Anna C Nobre
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2018-04-13       Impact factor: 14.919

8.  Decoding Rich Spatial Information with High Temporal Resolution.

Authors:  Mark G Stokes; Michael J Wolff; Eelke Spaak
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2015-10-01       Impact factor: 20.229

9.  From ERPs to MVPA Using the Amsterdam Decoding and Modeling Toolbox (ADAM).

Authors:  Johannes J Fahrenfort; Joram van Driel; Simon van Gaal; Christian N L Olivers
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2018-07-03       Impact factor: 4.677

10.  N-Back Task Training Helps to Improve Post-error Performance.

Authors:  Qing Li; Quanshan Long; Na Hu; Yancheng Tang; Antao Chen
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2020-03-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.