ArticleJournal of cognitive neuroscience2022
Distinct Neural Signatures of Outcome Monitoring After Selection and Execution Errors.
Article in Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Role of the N170 in Linking Stimuli to Feedback-Effects of Stimulus Modality and Feedback Delay.Psychophysiology · 2025Article
- Bridging event-related potentials with behavioral studies in motor learning.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Losing a point in tennis could result from poor shot selection or faulty stroke execution. To explore how the brain responds to these different types of errors, we examined feedback-locked EEG activity while participants completed a modified version of a standard three-armed bandit probabilistic reward task. Our task framed unrewarded outcomes as the result of either errors of selection or errors of execution. We examined whether amplitude of a medial frontal negativity (the feedback-related negativity [FRN]) was sensitive to the different forms of error attribution. Consistent with previous reports, selection errors elicited a large FRN relative to rewards, and amplitude of this signal correlated with behavioral adjustment after these errors. A different pattern was observed in response to execution errors. These outcomes produced a larger FRN, a frontocentral attenuation in activity preceding this component, and a subsequent enhanced error positivity in parietal sites. Notably, the only correlations with behavioral adjustment were with the early frontocentral attenuation and amplitude of the parietal signal; FRN differences between execution errors and rewarded trials did not correlate with subsequent changes in behavior. Our findings highlight distinct neural correlates of selection and execution error processing, providing insight into how the brain responds to the different classes of error that determine future action.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.