Search

Arousal evoked by detecting a performance error may provide a mechanism by which error detection leads to either adaptive or maladaptive changes in attention and performance. By pairing EEG data acquisition with simultaneous measurements of pupil diameter, which is thought to reflect norepinephrinergic arousal, this study tested whether transient changes in EEG oscillations in the alpha frequency range (8-12 Hz) following performance mistakes may reflect error-evoked arousal. In the inter-trial interval following performance mistakes (approximately 8% of trials), pupil diameter increased and EEG alpha power decreased, compared to the inter-trial interval following correct responses. Moreover when trials were binned based on pupil diameter on a within-subjects basis, trials with greater pupil diameter were associated with lower EEG alpha power during the inter-trial interval. This pattern of association suggests that error-related alpha suppression, like pupil dilation, reflects arousal in response to error commission. Errors were also followed by worse next-trial performance, implying that error-evoked arousal may not always be beneficial for adaptive control.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of varying intertrial interval (ITI) durations on neural signals of error monitoring, given the importance of the ITI as a time window for engaging in self-evaluation and cognitive control. In a between-subjects design, 35 participants were assigned to one of three ITI durations (short: 768 ms; medium: 1,280 ms; long: 1,792 ms) in a standard Stroop task while EEG was recorded. Participants in the short-ITI group demonstrated lower performance accuracy, a reduced error-related negativity (even when correcting for frequency of errors), lower error-related alpha suppression during the ITI, and increased post-error slowing. Results indicate that fast-paced trial timing can be disruptive to self-monitoring, perhaps due to capacity limitations or bottlenecks in processing.

The present study tested whether people adaptively sharpen attentional focus following performance mistakes, as predicted by current theories of cognitive control. Participants completed a reverse Stroop task in which target stimuli were preceded by an informative spatial cue. Cue validity and Stroop interference effects on performance were robust, but neither effect was altered by commission of an error on the prior trial, as predicted by the adaptive control model. Likewise, a prior error did not enhance cue-evoked spatial asymmetries in EEG, nor did it enhance validity effects on neural responses evoked by targets. Instead, errors were followed by poorer overall performance and generalized arousal, as measured by generally suppressed EEG alpha power in postresponse and cue-to-target intervals following errors compared to correct responses. Results support an alternative theory that post-error changes in neural activity and performance reflect arousal, orienting, or cognitive bottlenecking rather than adaptive control of attention.