Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37198385›Full record

ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2023

Slip or fallacy? Effects of error severity on own and observed pitch error processing in pianists.

Christine Albrecht, Christian Bellebaum

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Christine AlbrechtInstitute of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Universitätsstraße 1, building 23.03, room number 00.89, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany. christine.albrecht@hhu.de.
Christian BellebaumInstitute of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Universitätsstraße 1, building 23.03, room number 00.89, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Errors elicit a negative, mediofrontal, event-related potential (ERP), for both own errors (error-related negativity; ERN) and observed errors (here referred to as observer mediofrontal negativity; oMN). It is unclear, however, if the action-monitoring system codes action valence as an all-or-nothing phenomenon or if the system differentiates between errors of different severity. We investigated this question by recording electroencephalography (EEG) data of pianists playing themselves (Experiment 1) or watching others playing (Experiment 2). Piano pieces designed to elicit large errors were used. While active participants' ERN amplitudes differed between small and large errors, observers' oMN amplitudes did not. The different pattern in the two groups of participants was confirmed in an exploratory analysis comparing ERN and oMN directly. We suspect that both prediction and action mismatches can be coded in action monitoring systems, depending on the task, and a need-to-adapt signal is sent whenever mismatches happen to indicate the magnitude of the needed adaptation.

Indexed as

ElectroencephalographyEvoked PotentialsHumansPsychomotor PerformanceReaction TimeAction monitoringERNError severityObserved action monitoringoERN

Identifiers

PMID37198385
PMCPMC10400674

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.