Abstract
Post-error slowing (PES) is consistently observed in decision-making tasks after negative feedback. Yet, findings are inconclusive as to whether PES supports performance accuracy. We addressed the role of PES by employing drift diffusion modeling which enabled us to investigate latent processes of reaction times and accuracy on a large-scale dataset (>5,800 participants) of a visual search experiment with emotional face stimuli. In our experiment, post-error trials were characterized by both adaptive and non-adaptive decision processes. An adaptive increase in participants’ response threshold was sustained over several trials post-error. Contrarily, an initial decrease in evidence accumulation rate, followed by an increase on the subsequent trials, indicates a momentary distraction of task-relevant attention and resulted in an initial accuracy drop. Higher values of decision threshold and evidence accumulation on the post-error trial were associated with higher accuracy on subsequent trials which further gives credence to these parameters’ role in post-error adaptation. Finally, the evidence accumulation rate post-error decreased when the error trial presented angry faces, a finding suggesting that the post-error decision can be influenced by the error context. In conclusion, we demonstrate that error-related response adaptations are multi-component processes that change dynamically over several trials post-error.
Highlights
A typical response to errors in decision making tasks is an increase in response time on trials following the error (Rabbitt, 1969; Laming, 1979)
Whether post-error slowing (PES) is a beneficial process linked to a post-error improvement in accuracy in the sense of a speed-accuracy trade-off, as predicted by the cognitive control account (Laming, 1979; Bogacz et al, 2010), a by-product of a re-orienting process initiated by the error (Notebaert et al, 2009; Houtman and Notebaert, 2013), or a detrimental process reflecting capacity limitations in response monitoring (Jentzsch and Dudschig, 2009) is not clear
We extend the study of drift diffusion parameters to include five consecutive responses after the error to explore the impact of an error on forthcoming decisions
Summary
A typical response to errors in decision making tasks is an increase in response time on trials following the error (Rabbitt, 1969; Laming, 1979) This so-called post-error slowing (PES) has traditionally been attributed to indicate a cognitive control process (Botvinick et al, 2001; Ridderinkhof et al, 2004), ensuring more cautious decision making. Notebaert et al (2009) proposed that it is instead the commonly low frequency of errors which captures attentional resources Another explanation for a non-functional account of PES was given by Jentzsch and Dudschig (2009) who suggested that the post-error monitoring process takes up limited central resources and inhibits decision processes subsequent to the error
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
