SynthesisCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2022
Aversiveness of errors and the error-related negativity (ERN): A systematic review on the affective states' manipulations findings.
Synthesis in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neurophysiology of Sleep-Deprivation Part 1: Effects of Sleep-Deprivation on Event-Related Potentials (ERPs)-Systematic and Mechanistic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Feedback-driven event-related potentials in conditional discrimination: insights from a matching-to-sample study.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
- Negative emotions weaken the error monitoring ability of patients with borderline personality disorder.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2025Article
- Increasingly dependent on habit? A study on the electrophysiological mechanisms of goal-directed and habitual control in internet gaming disorder.Journal of behavioral addictions · 2025Article
- The neurobehavioral correlates of error processing in adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and their relationship with impulsivity.Clinical neurophysiology practice · 2025Article
- The Relationship Between Emotion Dysregulation and Error Monitoring in Adolescents with ADHD.Research on child and adolescent psychopathology · 2024Article
- Neural Circuitry-Related Biomarkers for Drug Development in Psychiatry: An Industry Perspective.Advances in neurobiology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Error-related negativity (ERN) has been used to investigate neural mechanisms underlying error processing and conflict monitoring. Recent evidence highlights that affective and motivational states modulate the ERN and that aversiveness of errors plays a vital role in error monitoring. Therefore, our primary objective was to systematically evaluate and describe the influence of affect state-related manipulations on the ERN. A total of 51 publications identified from PsyInfo, PubMed, and PsyArticles databases were included following the Prisma procedures for systematic reviews. Papers were analyzed using sample attributes, psychological paradigms, and states manipulations. The present study shows that the ERN component has recurrently appeared to be sensitive to manipulations of affective states in the reviewed literature. However, conclusive findings concerning the affect state-dependent properties of the ERN remain elusive. Results are discussed considering heterogeneity in paradigms, variables, and the state-trait interactions. Furthermore, recommendations for future high-quality studies are provided along with the necessity of upcoming high-power replication attempts and more studies with positive affect manipulations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35396631What 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.