ArticlePsychophysiology2026
Single-Trial Relationships Between the Error-Related Negativity, Pe, Error-Related Pupillary Dilation Response, and Post-Error Behavior.
Article in Psychophysiology, 2026. 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.
- Reaction Time Variability and Electrophysiological Indices of Performance Monitoring in Youths With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.Psychophysiology · 2026Article
- Single-Trial Relationships Between the Error-Related Negativity, Pe, Error-Related Pupillary Dilation Response, and Post-Error Behavior.Psychophysiology · 2026Article
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
Abstract
The amplitude of the error-related negativity (ERN) is known to be correlated with attention to task and general cognitive control abilities. However, previous research has struggled to consistently link ERN amplitude with behavioral accuracy or reaction time in the task from which the ERN is being measured. This lack of relationship could be due to many factors that are difficult to control for, so explorations of other converging measures to understand error-processing and subsequent behavior adjustment are warranted. The current study examines how two other physiological markers of error-processing-the phasic pupillary dilation response (PDR) and the positivity following an error (Pe)-relate to post-error behavior. Additionally, we also examine relationships between the three physiological indices of error-processing. In the study, EEG and pupillometry were simultaneously recorded while participants completed 24 blocks (50 trials each) of an Ericksen Flanker task. For post-error accuracy, we found that on a single-trial level, the amplitude of all three physiological error-processing indices for error trials predicted post-error accuracy. At the subject level, only the PDR predicted average post-error accuracy. For post-error slowing, at the single-trial level, only the Pe predicted post-error slowing, whereas only the ERN predicted post-error slowing at the subject level. We also found that both the ERN and Pe correlated with PDR amplitude. This is consistent with our hypothesis that the Pe and PDR may share underlying neural mechanisms, but qualified by the fact that the ERN, which is not hypothesized to have shared neural mechanisms, also predicted unique variance in pupillary amplitude. Collectively, these results suggest that the PDR and Pe might represent promising indicators of post-error behavior adjustment and highlight the need to examine relationships at multiple levels of analysis.
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.