Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31536142›Full record

ArticlePsychophysiology2020

Optimizing assessments of post-error slowing: A neurobehavioral investigation of a flanker task.

Hans S Schroder, Stefanie Nickels, Emilia Cardenas, Micah Breiger, Sarah Perlo, Diego A Pizzagalli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychophysiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Behavioral and neurophysiological signatures of cognitive control in humans and rats.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Early Action Error Processing Is Due to Domain-General Surprise, Whereas Later Processing Is Error Specific.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Post-error slowing in anxiety and obsessive-compulsive disorders.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Age-related qualitative differences in post-error cognitive control adjustments.The British journal of developmental psychology · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Hans S SchroderMcLean Hospital, Belmont, Massachusetts.ORCID 0000-0002-1162-6581
Stefanie NickelsMcLean Hospital, Belmont, Massachusetts.
Emilia CardenasMcLean Hospital, Belmont, Massachusetts.
Micah BreigerMcLean Hospital, Belmont, Massachusetts.
Sarah PerloMcLean Hospital, Belmont, Massachusetts.
Diego A PizzagalliMcLean Hospital, Belmont, Massachusetts.ORCID 0000-0002-7772-1143

Funding

Neuroimaging Studies of Reward Processing in DepressionR37MH068376 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI Diego A Pizzagalli · 2016 to 2026
$7.4M
Novel Cross-Species Neurophysiological Assays of Reward and Cognitive DomainsUH3MH109334 · NIMH · MCLEAN HOSPITAL · PI PIZZAGALLI, DIEGO A · 2018 to 2021
$1.8M
Novel Cross-Species Neurophysiological Assays of Reward and Cognitive DomainsUH2MH109334 · NIMH · MCLEAN HOSPITAL · PI PIZZAGALLI, DIEGO A · 2016 to 2017
$1.5M
NIMH NIH HHS R37 MH068376NIMH NIH HHS UH2 MH109334NIMH NIH HHS UH3 MH109334
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Appropriately adjusting to errors is essential for adaptive behavior. Post-error slowing (PES) refers to the increased reaction times on trials following incorrect relative to correct responses. PES has been used as a metric of cognitive control in basic cognitive neuroscience research as well as clinical contexts. However, calculation of PES varies widely among studies and has not yet been standardized, despite recent calls to optimize its measurement. Here, using behavioral and electrophysiological data from a modified flanker task, we considered different methods of calculating PES, assessed their internal consistency, examined their convergent correlations with behavioral performance and error-related event-related brain potentials (ERPs), and evaluated their sensitivity to task demands (e.g., presence of trial-to-trial feedback). Results indicated that the so-called robust measure of PES, calculated using only error-surrounding trials, provided an estimate of PES that was three times larger in magnitude than the traditional calculation. This robust PES correlated with the amplitude of the error positivity (Pe), an index of attention allocation to errors, just as well as the traditional method. However, all PES estimates had very weak internal consistency. Implications for measurement are discussed.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAttentionElectroencephalographyEvoked PotentialsExecutive FunctionFeedback, PsychologicalFemaleHumansMalePsychomotor PerformanceReaction TimeYoung AdultERPserror positivityerror-related negativityperformance monitoringpost-error behavioral adjustmentspost-error slowing

Identifiers

PMID31536142
PMCPMC6982543

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.