Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30069791›Full record

ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2018

Common mechanisms in error monitoring and action effect monitoring.

Robert Steinhauser, Robert Wirth, Wilfried Kunde, Markus Janczyk, Marco Steinhauser

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Post-execution monitoring in dishonesty.Psychological research · 2023
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Feature binding contributions to effect monitoring.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2020
    Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Robert SteinhauserDepartment of Psychology, Catholic University of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt, Ostenstraße 25, D-85072, Eichstätt, Germany. Robert.Steinhauser@ku.de.
Robert WirthDepartment of Psychology, Julius Maximilians University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Wilfried KundeDepartment of Psychology, Julius Maximilians University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Markus JanczykDepartment of Psychology, Eberhard Karls University, Tübingen, Germany.
Marco SteinhauserDepartment of Psychology, Catholic University of Eichstätt-Ingolstadt, Ostenstraße 25, D-85072, Eichstätt, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the present study, we considered error-related brain activity in event-related potentials, to investigate the relationship between error monitoring-that is, the detection and evaluation of erroneous responses-and action effect monitoring-that is, monitoring of the sensory consequences of behavior. To this end, participants worked on a task-switching paradigm that consisted of a free-choice task, in which a puzzle piece had to be attached to an existing one (the prime task), and a subsequent color flanker task (the probe task). We examined whether unexpected action effects in the prime task would affect the subsequent error monitoring in the probe task. We found the neural correlates of error monitoring during the probe task, the error-related negativity as well as the error positivity, to be increased after unexpected action effects in the prime task. In contrast, the neural correlates of visual attention were decreased after unexpected action effects, in line with recent findings on an attenuation of sensory processing after errors. Our results demonstrate a direct link between monitoring processes in the two tasks. We propose that both error monitoring and action effect monitoring rely on a common generic monitoring system related to novelty detection or affective processing. Preactivating this system by means of unexpected action effects increases the sensitivity for detecting an error in the subsequent task.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAttentionBrainCognitionElectroencephalographyEvoked PotentialsFemaleHumansNeuropsychological TestsPhotic StimulationPsychomotor PerformanceReaction TimeYoung AdultCognitive controlERPEvent processing

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.