The influence of unaware errors on post-error adjustment: Evidence from electrophysiological analysis

IF 1.3 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Wang Lijun, Suo Tao, Zhao Guoxiang
{"title":"The influence of unaware errors on post-error adjustment: Evidence from electrophysiological analysis","authors":"Wang Lijun, Suo Tao, Zhao Guoxiang","doi":"10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.01189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"control, the time-frequency analysis is conducted in this experiment. It has been suggested that the alpha band (8-14 Hz) reflects the trial-by-trial behavioral adjustment. Thus, alpha power is chosen as the neural indicator. As a result, the post-error reaction time indicated two dissociated behavior patterns with speeding up following aware errors and slowing down following unaware errors. However, accuracy in trials following aware and unaware errors was significantly higher than for trials following correct go. At the neural level, alpha (−500 to 500 ms) power was stronger for aware errors than for unaware errors. Moreover, the alpha was activated before the subjective report of error awareness for aware errors, but the alpha was activated after the subjective report of error awareness for unaware errors. Current behavioral results showed that aware and unaware errors both successfully optimized post-error performance, but the two error types adopted different methods to adjust post-error behaviors. The time-frequency analysis revealed that aware errors led to sustained attention control after responses, but unaware errors led to temporary attention control induced by the subjective report of error awareness. Therefore, these findings might suggest that the adjustments following aware errors were based on a strategy such as proactive control, whereas the adjustments following unaware errors were based on a strategy such as reactive control.","PeriodicalId":36627,"journal":{"name":"心理学报","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"心理学报","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.01189","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

control, the time-frequency analysis is conducted in this experiment. It has been suggested that the alpha band (8-14 Hz) reflects the trial-by-trial behavioral adjustment. Thus, alpha power is chosen as the neural indicator. As a result, the post-error reaction time indicated two dissociated behavior patterns with speeding up following aware errors and slowing down following unaware errors. However, accuracy in trials following aware and unaware errors was significantly higher than for trials following correct go. At the neural level, alpha (−500 to 500 ms) power was stronger for aware errors than for unaware errors. Moreover, the alpha was activated before the subjective report of error awareness for aware errors, but the alpha was activated after the subjective report of error awareness for unaware errors. Current behavioral results showed that aware and unaware errors both successfully optimized post-error performance, but the two error types adopted different methods to adjust post-error behaviors. The time-frequency analysis revealed that aware errors led to sustained attention control after responses, but unaware errors led to temporary attention control induced by the subjective report of error awareness. Therefore, these findings might suggest that the adjustments following aware errors were based on a strategy such as proactive control, whereas the adjustments following unaware errors were based on a strategy such as reactive control.
无意识误差对误差后调整的影响:来自电生理分析的证据
控制,本实验进行了时频分析。有人认为,阿尔法波段(8-14Hz)反映了一次又一次的试验行为调整。因此,选择α功率作为神经指标。结果,错误后反应时间表明了两种分离的行为模式,即在意识到错误后加速和在意识不到错误后减速。然而,在意识到和未意识到错误后的试验中,准确率明显高于正确围棋后的试验。在神经水平上,有意识错误的α(-500至500ms)功率比无意识错误更强。此外,阿尔法在意识到错误的错误意识主观报告之前被激活,但阿尔法在意识不到错误的误差意识主观报告之后被激活。当前的行为结果表明,意识错误和非意识错误都成功地优化了错误后的性能,但这两种错误类型采用了不同的方法来调整错误后的行为。时频分析表明,有意识的错误导致反应后的持续注意力控制,而无意识的错误则导致错误意识主观报告引起的暂时注意力控制。因此,这些发现可能表明,意识到错误之后的调整是基于主动控制等策略,而意识到错误后的调整则是基于反应控制等策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
心理学报
心理学报 Psychology-Psychology (all)
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
13.30%
发文量
1612
期刊介绍:
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信