Why the study?
It was unclear how the brain responds to different types of errors, such as errors of selection versus errors of execution.
The brain exhibits distinct neural correlates for processing selection versus execution errors, which differentially predict subsequent behavioral adjustments.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Differentiates neural error processing in EEG; leaves open whether targeting these signals improves behavioral outcomes in clinical settings.
Losing a point in tennis could result from poor shot selection or faulty stroke execution. To explore how the brain responds to these different types of errors, we examined feedback-locked EEG activity while participants completed a modified version of a standard three-armed bandit probabilistic reward task. Our task framed unrewarded outcomes as either the result of errors of selection or errors of execution. We examined whether amplitude of a medial frontal negativity (the Feedback-Related Negativity; FRN) was sensitive to the different forms of error attribution. Consistent with previous reports, selection errors elicited a large FRN relative to rewards and amplitude of this signal correlated behavioral adjustment following these errors. A different pattern was observed in response to execution errors. These outcomes produced a larger FRN, a frontocentral attenuation in activity preceding this component, and a subsequent enhanced error positivity in parietal sites. Notably, the only correlations with behavioral adjustment were with the early frontocentral attenuation and amplitude of the parietal signal; FRN differences between execution errors and rewarded trials did not correlate with subsequent changes in behavior. Our findings highlight distinct neural correlates of selection and execution error processing, providing insight into how the brain responds to the different classes of error that determine future action.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mushtaq et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: