Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35128675›Full record

ArticlePsychophysiology2022

Group differences in agency modulate error monitoring.

Elizabeth A Bauer, Annmarie MacNamara

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychophysiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Elizabeth A BauerDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5521-7712
Annmarie MacNamaraDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0399-973X

Funding

HARM-A: A neurobiological predictor of comorbidity and stress reactivity in anxiety disordersR01MH125083 · NIMH · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY · PI MACNAMARA, ANNMARIE EILEEN · 2021 to 2025
$3.3M
Brain-Behavior Markers of Negative Affectivity, Comorbidity in Anxiety DisordersK23MH105553 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO · PI MACNAMARA, ANNMARIE EILEEN · 2015 to 2018
$648k
NIMH NIH HHS K23 MH105553NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH125083
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mistakes can lead to aversive outcomes. Error monitoring may help prevent mistakes, but it might be maladaptive for individuals who lack control over aversive outcomes, as it consumes cognitive processing resources that could be allocated elsewhere. Here, we examined the effect of agency (i.e., control over punishment) on error monitoring using the error-related negativity (ERN), an event-related potential measure of error monitoring and error rate. Ninety unselected participants performed a flanker task in which they were shocked according to their own errors (controllable punishment, n = 47) or were shocked in accordance with another participant's errors (uncontrollable punishment, n = 43). Participants without agency over punishment showed smaller ERNs and higher error rates compared with participants with agency. Furthermore, punishment only reduced error rates for participants with agency. Together, these results provide the first experimental evidence that agency modulates error monitoring and suggest an adaptive process in which error monitoring is increased/decreased depending on its utility.

Indexed as

ElectroencephalographyEvoked PotentialsAffectHumansPsychomotor PerformancePunishmentReaction Timeagencyerror monitoringerror-related negativity (ERN)learned helplessnesspunishmentyoking

Identifiers

PMID35128675
PMCPMC10859172

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.