Why do we make mistakes? Neurocognitive processes during the preparation-perception-action cycle and error-detection

Rinaldo Livio Perri, Marika Berchicci, Giuliana Lucci, Donatella Spinelli, Francesco Di Russo

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

29 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The event-related potential (ERP) literature described two error-related brain activities: the error-related negativity (Ne/ERN) and the error positivity (Pe), peaking immediately after the erroneous response. ERP studies on error processing adopted a response-locked approach, thus, the question about the activities preceding the error is still open. In the present study, we tested the hypothesis that the activities preceding the false alarms (FA) are different from those occurring in the correct (responded or inhibited) trials. To this aim, we studied a sample of 36 Go/No-go performers, adopting a stimulus-locked segmentation also including the pre-motor brain activities. Present results showed that neither pre-stimulus nor perceptual activities explain why we commit FA. In contrast, we observed condition-related differences in two pre-response components: the fronto-central N2 and the prefrontal positivity (pP), respectively peaking at 250. ms and 310. ms after the stimulus onset. The N2 amplitude of FA was identical to that recorded in No-go trials, and larger than Hits. Because the new findings challenge the previous interpretations on the N2, a new perspective is discussed. On the other hand, the pP in the FA trials was larger than No-go and smaller than Go, suggesting an erroneous processing at the stimulus-response mapping level: because this stage triggers the response execution, we concluded that the neural processes underlying the pP were mainly responsible for the subsequent error commission. Finally, sLORETA source analyses of the post-error potentials extended previous findings indicating, for the first time in the ERP literature, the right anterior insula as Pe generator.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)320-328
Number of pages9
JournalNeuroImage
Volume113
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 1 2015

Fingerprint

Evoked Potentials
Brain
Motor Activity

Keywords

  • Error positivity (Pe)
  • Error-related negativity (Ne/ERN)
  • Event Related Potentials (ERPs)
  • False Alarms (FA)
  • Prefrontal positivity (pP)
  • SLORETA

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Neurology
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Why do we make mistakes? Neurocognitive processes during the preparation-perception-action cycle and error-detection. / Perri, Rinaldo Livio; Berchicci, Marika; Lucci, Giuliana; Spinelli, Donatella; Di Russo, Francesco.

In: NeuroImage, Vol. 113, 01.06.2015, p. 320-328.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ad137cc9fd8942e398eee352038656b6,
title = "Why do we make mistakes? Neurocognitive processes during the preparation-perception-action cycle and error-detection",
abstract = "The event-related potential (ERP) literature described two error-related brain activities: the error-related negativity (Ne/ERN) and the error positivity (Pe), peaking immediately after the erroneous response. ERP studies on error processing adopted a response-locked approach, thus, the question about the activities preceding the error is still open. In the present study, we tested the hypothesis that the activities preceding the false alarms (FA) are different from those occurring in the correct (responded or inhibited) trials. To this aim, we studied a sample of 36 Go/No-go performers, adopting a stimulus-locked segmentation also including the pre-motor brain activities. Present results showed that neither pre-stimulus nor perceptual activities explain why we commit FA. In contrast, we observed condition-related differences in two pre-response components: the fronto-central N2 and the prefrontal positivity (pP), respectively peaking at 250. ms and 310. ms after the stimulus onset. The N2 amplitude of FA was identical to that recorded in No-go trials, and larger than Hits. Because the new findings challenge the previous interpretations on the N2, a new perspective is discussed. On the other hand, the pP in the FA trials was larger than No-go and smaller than Go, suggesting an erroneous processing at the stimulus-response mapping level: because this stage triggers the response execution, we concluded that the neural processes underlying the pP were mainly responsible for the subsequent error commission. Finally, sLORETA source analyses of the post-error potentials extended previous findings indicating, for the first time in the ERP literature, the right anterior insula as Pe generator.",
keywords = "Error positivity (Pe), Error-related negativity (Ne/ERN), Event Related Potentials (ERPs), False Alarms (FA), Prefrontal positivity (pP), SLORETA",
author = "Perri, {Rinaldo Livio} and Marika Berchicci and Giuliana Lucci and Donatella Spinelli and {Di Russo}, Francesco",
year = "2015",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.03.040",
language = "English",
volume = "113",
pages = "320--328",
journal = "NeuroImage",
issn = "1053-8119",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Why do we make mistakes? Neurocognitive processes during the preparation-perception-action cycle and error-detection

AU - Perri, Rinaldo Livio

AU - Berchicci, Marika

AU - Lucci, Giuliana

AU - Spinelli, Donatella

AU - Di Russo, Francesco

PY - 2015/6/1

Y1 - 2015/6/1

N2 - The event-related potential (ERP) literature described two error-related brain activities: the error-related negativity (Ne/ERN) and the error positivity (Pe), peaking immediately after the erroneous response. ERP studies on error processing adopted a response-locked approach, thus, the question about the activities preceding the error is still open. In the present study, we tested the hypothesis that the activities preceding the false alarms (FA) are different from those occurring in the correct (responded or inhibited) trials. To this aim, we studied a sample of 36 Go/No-go performers, adopting a stimulus-locked segmentation also including the pre-motor brain activities. Present results showed that neither pre-stimulus nor perceptual activities explain why we commit FA. In contrast, we observed condition-related differences in two pre-response components: the fronto-central N2 and the prefrontal positivity (pP), respectively peaking at 250. ms and 310. ms after the stimulus onset. The N2 amplitude of FA was identical to that recorded in No-go trials, and larger than Hits. Because the new findings challenge the previous interpretations on the N2, a new perspective is discussed. On the other hand, the pP in the FA trials was larger than No-go and smaller than Go, suggesting an erroneous processing at the stimulus-response mapping level: because this stage triggers the response execution, we concluded that the neural processes underlying the pP were mainly responsible for the subsequent error commission. Finally, sLORETA source analyses of the post-error potentials extended previous findings indicating, for the first time in the ERP literature, the right anterior insula as Pe generator.

AB - The event-related potential (ERP) literature described two error-related brain activities: the error-related negativity (Ne/ERN) and the error positivity (Pe), peaking immediately after the erroneous response. ERP studies on error processing adopted a response-locked approach, thus, the question about the activities preceding the error is still open. In the present study, we tested the hypothesis that the activities preceding the false alarms (FA) are different from those occurring in the correct (responded or inhibited) trials. To this aim, we studied a sample of 36 Go/No-go performers, adopting a stimulus-locked segmentation also including the pre-motor brain activities. Present results showed that neither pre-stimulus nor perceptual activities explain why we commit FA. In contrast, we observed condition-related differences in two pre-response components: the fronto-central N2 and the prefrontal positivity (pP), respectively peaking at 250. ms and 310. ms after the stimulus onset. The N2 amplitude of FA was identical to that recorded in No-go trials, and larger than Hits. Because the new findings challenge the previous interpretations on the N2, a new perspective is discussed. On the other hand, the pP in the FA trials was larger than No-go and smaller than Go, suggesting an erroneous processing at the stimulus-response mapping level: because this stage triggers the response execution, we concluded that the neural processes underlying the pP were mainly responsible for the subsequent error commission. Finally, sLORETA source analyses of the post-error potentials extended previous findings indicating, for the first time in the ERP literature, the right anterior insula as Pe generator.

KW - Error positivity (Pe)

KW - Error-related negativity (Ne/ERN)

KW - Event Related Potentials (ERPs)

KW - False Alarms (FA)

KW - Prefrontal positivity (pP)

KW - SLORETA

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84937760694&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84937760694&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.03.040

DO - 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.03.040

M3 - Article

C2 - 25812715

AN - SCOPUS:84937760694

VL - 113

SP - 320

EP - 328

JO - NeuroImage

JF - NeuroImage

SN - 1053-8119

ER -