Effects of feedback reliability on event-related potentials in an arrow flanker task.
Journal
Neuroreport
ISSN: 1473-558X
Titre abrégé: Neuroreport
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9100935
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 10 2023
04 10 2023
Historique:
medline:
12
9
2023
pubmed:
9
8
2023
entrez:
9
8
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The processing of feedback is essential for learning, error detection, and correction. However, the underlying mechanisms of the feedback's characteristics, such as its reliability, valence, and expectations in the processing of error information, are not completely clear. The two degrees of feedback reliability, reliable feedback and unreliable feedback, respectively, were established by manipulating the feedback valence. The time course of event-related potentials (ERP) during the arrow flanker tasks was used to investigate the effects of feedback reliability and responses on brain activity. Three ERP components, the error-related negativity (ERN), feedback-related negativity (FRN), and P3, respectively, were measured. The impacts of feedback reliability and responses on ERN, FRN, and P3 had a different profile. Specifically, ERN and P3 are associated with the responses but not the feedback reliability, while FRN is associated with feedback reliability and feedback expectations but not the responses. The ERN, FRN, and P3 reflect distinct cognitive processes in the processing of error information.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37556590
doi: 10.1097/WNR.0000000000001944
pii: 00001756-990000000-00145
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
693-702Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Références
Amitay S, Moore DR, Molloy K, Halliday LF. Feedback valence affects auditory perceptual learning independently of feedback probability. PLoS One 2015; 10:e0126412.
Rigoli F, Martinelli C, Shergill SS. The role of expecting feedback during decision-making under risk. Neuroimage 2019; 202:116079.
Ernst B Steinhauser M. Effects of feedback reliability on feedback-related brain activity: a feedback valuation account. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 2018; 18:596–608.
Hoffmann S Falkenstein M. Predictive information processing in the brain: errors and response monitoring. Int J Psychophysiol 2012; 83:208–212.
Maurer LK, Joch M, Hegele M, Maurer H, Müller H. Predictive error processing distinguishes between relevant and irrelevant errors after visuomotor learning. J Vis 2019; 19:18.
Vilà-Balló A, Hdez-Lafuente P, Rostan C, Cunillera T, Rodriguez-Fornells A. Neurophysiological correlates of error monitoring and inhibitory processing in juvenile violent offenders. Biol Psychol 2014; 102:141–152.
Eriksen CW Eriksen BA. Visual perceptual processing rates and backward and forward masking. J Exp Psychol 1971; 89:306–313.
Imburgio MJ, Banica I, Hill KE, Weinberg A, Foti D, MacNamara A. Establishing norms for error-related brain activity during the arrow Flanker task among young adults. Neuroimage 2020; 213:116694.
Coles MG, Scheffers MK, Holroyd CB. Why is there an ERN/Ne on correct trials? Response representations, stimulus-related components, and the theory of error-processing. Biol Psychol 2001; 56:173–189.
Cavanagh JF, Gründler TO, Frank MJ, Allen JJ. Altered cingulate sub-region activation accounts for task-related dissociation in ERN amplitude as a function of obsessive-compulsive symptoms. Neuropsychologia 2010; 48:2098–2109.
Unger K, Heintz S, Kray J. Punishment sensitivity modulates the processing of negative feedback but not error-induced learning. Front Hum Neurosci 2012; 6:186.
Riesel A. The erring brain: error-related negativity as an endophenotype for OCD-a review and meta-analysis. Psychophysiology 2019; 56:e13348.
Weinberg A, Dieterich R, Riesel A. Error-related brain activity in the age of RDoC: a review of the literature. Int J Psychophysiol 2015; 98:276–299.
Heldmann M, Rüsseler J, Münte TF. Internal and external information in error processing. BMC Neurosci 2008; 9:33.
Maurer LK, Joch M, Hegele M, Müller H. Focused review on neural correlates of different types of motor errors and related terminological issues. J Hum Kinet 2021; 76:67–81.
Torrecillos F, Albouy P, Brochier T, Malfait N. Does the processing of sensory and reward-prediction errors involve common neural resources? Evidence from a frontocentral negative potential modulated by movement execution errors. J Neurosci 2014; 34:4845–4856.
Weismüller B Bellebaum C. Expectancy affects the feedback-related negativity (FRN) for delayed feedback in probabilistic learning. Psychophysiology 2016; 53:1739–1750.
Hauser TU, Iannaccone R, Stämpfli P, Drechsler R, Brandeis D, Walitza S, et al. The feedback-related negativity (FRN) revisited: new insights into the localization, meaning and network organization. Neuroimage 2014; 84:159–168.
Walentowska W, Moors A, Paul K, Pourtois G. Goal relevance influences performance monitoring at the level of the FRN and P3 components. Psychophysiology 2016; 53:1020–1033.
Schiffer AM, Siletti K, Waszak F, Yeung N. Adaptive behaviour and feedback processing integrate experience and instruction in reinforcement learning. Neuroimage 2017; 146:626–641.
Dimoska A, Johnstone SJ, Barry RJ. The auditory-evoked N2 and P3 components in the stop-signal task: indices of inhibition, response-conflict or error-detection? Brain Cogn 2006; 62:98–112.
Severo MC, Paul K, Walentowska W, Moors A, Pourtois G. Neurophysiological evidence for evaluative feedback processing depending on goal relevance. Neuroimage 2020; 215:116857.
Di Gregorio F, Ernst B, Steinhauser M. Differential effects of instructed and objective feedback reliability on feedback-related brain activity. Psychophysiology 2019; 56:e13399.
Scheffers MK Coles MGH. Performance monitoring in a confusing world: error-related brain activity, judgments of response accuracy, and types of errors. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 2000; 26:141–151.