ArticleJournal of cognition2022
Frankly, My Error, I Don't Give a Damn: Retrieval of Goal-Based but Not Coactivation-Based Bindings after Erroneous Responses.
Article in Journal of cognition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Binding continuous response features of extended movements: Integration with discrete response but not stimulus features.Psychological research · 2026Article
- Feature binding and error commission.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
- Negative Feedback Does Not Reverse Observationally Acquired Binding and Retrieval Effects: A Failed Replication.Journal of cognition · 2026Article
- Binding a stimulus after, but not before, response execution: examining the temporal binding window of event files.Psychological research · 2025Article
- Guess what? Only correct choices forge immediate stimulus-response bindings in guessing scenarios.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2024Article
- What is left after an error? Towards a comprehensive account of goal-based binding and retrieval.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2023Article
- Core Mechanisms in Action Control: Binding and Retrieval.Journal of cognition · 2023Article
- Accounting for Proportion Congruency Effects in the Stroop Task in a Confounded Setup: Retrieval of Stimulus-Response Episodes Explains it All.Journal of cognition · 2022Article
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
Previous studies demonstrated binding and retrieval of stimuli and correct responses even for those episodes in which the actual response was wrong (goal-based binding and retrieval). In the current study, we tested whether binding based on a co-activation of stimuli and erroneous responses occurred simultaneously with goal-based binding, which could have been masked by a more efficient retrieval of goal-based bindings in previous studies. In a pre-registered experiment (n = 62), we employed a sequential prime-probe design with a three-choice colour categorisation task. Including three different responses in the task allowed us to conduct separate tests for stimulus-based episodic retrieval of either the correct response (goal-based) or of the actual erroneous response (coactivation-based) after committing an error. Replicating previous findings, our study provides support for goal-based binding of stimuli and correct responses after errors, while showing that there is no independent coactivation-based binding of the erroneous response itself.
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.