Aware Errors Research Articles

Brain signatures of error awareness during cognitive tasks for humans in the flight environment.

At present, many scientific experiments are carried out in extreme conditions. Pilots need to perform high-intensity tasks for a long time. Human error is an essential factor affecting mission execution. To deeply study the physiological characteristics of different erroneous states of consciousness, we used an improved double-choice Oddball paradigm to collect brain electrophysiological signals of volunteers and pilots in missions and analyze event-related potential (ERP), time-frequency, and brain function spectrum, extracting EEG indicators sensitive to error awareness. The results showed that, in the 300∼500 ms time window, the error awareness type was correlated with Pe amplitude. Meanwhile, the time-frequency and brain functional spectrum analysis showed that the amplitude of the aware errors α-ERS oscillation, the functional spectral density of the α-band, and the uncertain errors were more prominent than unaware errors. The error awareness of the pilots showed the same EEG sensitivity characteristics in flight as in the ground volunteer experiment, and the characteristic sensitivity value was higher than that of the ground participants. We analyzed the EEG indicators sensitive to error awareness and determined the differences in EEG characteristics when pilots have error awareness on the ground and in flight. This study provides theoretical guidance for the follow-up research on the intervention measures against error awareness and determines the target point positioning.

Examining the neural correlates of error awareness in a large fMRI study.

Goal-directed behavior is dependent upon the ability to detect errors and implement appropriate posterror adjustments. Accordingly, several studies have explored the neural activity underlying error-monitoring processes, identifying the insula cortex as crucial for error awareness and reporting mixed findings with respect to the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). Variable patterns of activation have previously been attributed to insufficient statistical power. We therefore sought to clarify the neural correlates of error awareness in a large event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study. Four hundred and two healthy participants undertook the error awareness task, a motor Go/No-Go response inhibition paradigm in which participants were required to indicate their awareness of commission errors. Compared to unaware errors, aware errors were accompanied by significantly greater activity in a network of regions, including the insula cortex, supramarginal gyrus (SMG), and midline structures, such as the ACC and supplementary motor area (SMA). Error awareness activity was related to indices of task performance and dimensional measures of psychopathology in selected regions, including the insula, SMG, and SMA. Taken together, we identified a robust and reliable neural network associated with error awareness.

Adaptation following errors: Error awareness predicts future performance.

The ability to detect an error in performance is critical to ongoing and future goal-directed behaviour. Diminished awareness of errors has been associated with a loss of insight and poor functional recovery in several clinical disorders (e.g., attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, addiction, schizophrenia). Despite the clear imperative to understand and remediate such deficits, error awareness and its instantiation in corrective behaviour remains to be fully elucidated. The present study investigated the relationship between error awareness and future performance in order to determine whether conscious recognition of errors facilitates adaptive behaviour. Fifty-one healthy participants completed a motor Go/No-Go error awareness task that afforded the opportunity to learn from errors. A mixed-effects model was specified wherein awareness of an error was used to predict inhibitory performance on the following No-Go trial. The model revealed a significant predictive effect of error awareness on future performance, such that aware errors were more frequently followed by correct inhibitory performance. Notably, improvement in performance accuracy was not due to a temporary increase in conservatism of responding, but appeared to be a context-specific adaptation. These results highlight the adaptive role of error awareness and the relationship between error awareness and learning from errors that has the potential to contribute to clinical symptomatology.

HIV infection is linked with reduced error-related default mode network suppression and poorer medication management abilities

ObjectiveBrain activity linked with error processing has rarely been examined among persons living with HIV (PLWH) despite importance for monitoring and modifying behaviors that could lead to adverse health outcomes (e.g., medication non-adherence, drug use, risky sexual practices). Given that cannabis (CB) use is prevalent among PLWH and impacts error processing, we assessed the influence of HIV serostatus and chronic CB use on error-related brain activity while also considering associated implications for everyday functioning and clinically-relevant disease management behaviors. MethodsA sample of 109 participants, stratified into four groups by HIV and CB (HIV+/CB+, n = 32; HIV+/CB−, n = 27; HIV−/CB+, n = 28; HIV−/CB−, n = 22), underwent fMRI scanning while completing a modified Go/NoGo paradigm called the Error Awareness Task (EAT). Participants also completed a battery of well-validated instruments including a subjective report of everyday cognitive failures and an objective measure of medication management abilities. ResultsAcross all participants, we observed expected error-related anterior insula (aI) activation which correlated with better task performance (i.e., less errors) and, among HIV− participants, fewer self-reported cognitive failures. Regarding awareness, greater insula activation as well as greater posterior cingulate cortex (PCC) deactivation were notably linked with aware (vs. unaware) errors. Regarding group effects, unlike HIV− participants, PLWH displayed a lack of error-related deactivation in two default mode network (DMN) regions (i.e., PCC, medial prefrontal cortex [mPFC]). No CB main or interaction effects were detected. Across all participants, reduced error-related PCC deactivation correlated with reduced medication management abilities and PCC deactivation mediated the effect of HIV on such abilities. More lifetime CB use was linked with reduced error-related mPFC deactivation among HIV− participants and poorer medication management across CB users. ConclusionsThese results demonstrate that insufficient error-related DMN suppression linked with HIV infection, as well as chronic CB use among HIV− participants, has real-world consequences for medication management behaviors. We speculate that insufficient DMN suppression may reflect an inability to disengage task irrelevant mental operations, ultimately hindering error monitoring and behavior modification.

The Role of Motivation and Anxiety on Error Awareness in Younger and Older Adults.

Aging is associated with several changes in cognitive functions, as well as in motivational and affective processes, which in turn interact with cognitive functions. The present study aimed to investigate error awareness (EA), which declines with aging, in relation to motivation and anxiety. Adopting an experimental task, we firstly tested the hypothesis that EA could be enhanced through reward motivation. Secondly, we explored the relation between state and trait anxiety and EA, investigating the hypothesis of an association between EA and anxiety, and between anxiety and the potential benefit of motivation on EA. Thirty healthy younger (age range: 19–35 years; mean age 25.4 ± 5.1; 10 M) and 30 healthy older adults (age range: 61–83 years; mean age 69.7 ± 5.5; 12 M) took part in the study and performed both the classic Error Awareness Task (EAT) and one experimental task, called the Motivational EAT. In this new task, motivational incentives were delivered after aware correct responses and aware errors. For every participant, standard measures of state and trait anxiety and cognitive functions were collected. Confirming the presence of a significant age-related EA decline, results did not reveal any influence of reward motivation on EA, nor any relation between EA and anxiety. However, both younger and older adults had longer response times (RTs) and made more errors during the Motivational EAT, with the more anxious participants showing the greater RT slowing. Findings suggest that reward motivation might not be always beneficial for cognitive performance, as well as that anxiety does not relate to EA capacity. Results also recommend further investigation, as well as the assessment of EA in patients with either motivational deficits like apathy, and/or with anxiety disorders.

Neural and behavioral traces of error awareness

Monitoring for errors and behavioral adjustments after errors are essential for daily life. A question that has not been addressed systematically yet, is whether consciously perceived errors lead to different behavioral adjustments compared to unperceived errors. Our goal was to develop a task that would enable us to study different commonly observed neural correlates of error processing and post-error adjustments in their relation to error awareness and accuracy confidence in a single experiment. We assessed performance in a new number judgement error awareness task in 70 participants. We used multiple, robust, single-trial EEG regressions to investigate the link between neural correlates of error processing (e.g., error-related negativity (ERN) and error positivity (Pe)) and error awareness. We found that only aware errors had a slowing effect on reaction times in consecutive trials, but this slowing was not accompanied by post-error increases in accuracy. On a neural level, error awareness and confidence had a modulating effect on both the ERN and Pe, whereby the Pe was most predictive of participants’ error awareness. Additionally, we found partial support for a mediating role of error awareness on the coupling between the ERN and behavioral adjustments in the following trial. Our results corroborate previous findings that show both an ERN/Pe and a post-error behavioral adaptation modulation by error awareness. This suggests that conscious error perception can support meta-control processes balancing the recruitment of proactive and reactive control. Furthermore, this study strengthens the role of the Pe as a robust neural index of error awareness.

Error-related negativity and error awareness in a Go/No-go task

Error monitoring is crucial for the conscious error perception, however, the role of early error monitoring in error awareness remains unclear. Here, we investigated the relation between the ERN and error-related theta oscillations and the emergence of error awareness by conducting time- and phase-locked averaging analysis based on 4–8 Hz filtered data and phase-locked time frequency analysis. Results showed that while the ERN did not differ significantly between aware and unaware errors, theta power was stronger for aware errors than for unaware errors. Further, when continuous EEG was filtered outside the theta band, the ERN results confirmed this pattern. Additionally, when the non-phase-locked component was removed from continuous EEG, stronger theta power was still observed in aware errors compared to unaware errors. Collectively, these findings may suggest that (1) the ERN emerges from phase-locked component of theta band EEG activities; (2) the ERN engages in conscious error perception and serves the emerging error awareness through the activity of theta oscillations. Thus, early error monitoring is a precursor to error awareness, but this relationship is masked by high-frequency activity in aware errors when the ERN is not filtered outside the theta band in the Go/No-go task.

Error blindness and motivational significance: Shifts in networks centering on anterior insula co-vary with error awareness and pupil dilation

This investigation aims to further our understanding of the brain mechanisms underlying the awareness of one’s erroneous actions. While all errors are registered as such in the rostral cingulate zone, errors enter awareness only when the anterior insula cortex is activated. Aware but not unaware errors elicit autonomic nervous system reactivity. Our aim is to investigate the hypothesis that activation in the insula during error awareness is related to autonomic arousal and to inter-regional interactions with other areas of the brain. To examine the role of the anterior insula in error awareness, we assessed its functional connectivity to other brain regions along with autonomic nervous system reactivity in young healthy participants who underwent simultaneous pupil-diameter and functional magnetic resonance imaging measurements while performing a complex and error-prone task. Error blindness was associated with failures to engage sufficient autonomic reactivity. During aware errors increased pupil-diameter along with increased task-related activation within, and increased connectivity between anterior insula and task-related networks suggested an increased capacity for action-control information transfer. Increased pupil-diameter during aware errors was furthermore associated with decreased activation of the default-mode network along with decreased insular connectivity with regions of the default mode system, possibly reflecting decreased task-irrelevant information processing. This shifting mechanism may be relevant to a better understanding of how the brain and the autonomic nervous system interact to enable efficient adaptive behavior during cognitive challenge

The Role of Mindfulness and Emotional Stability in Error Detection

Previous studies showed that mindfulness training and emotional stability had an impact on neural correlates of error processing. However, the impact of both trait mindfulness and emotional stability on error detection processes were not simultaneously investigated, although one could assume that there are interacting effects of the traits. We examined the individual variations of a component of the event-related potential (ERP), the error negativity (Ne/ERN), and behavioral data related to the two traits in a modified Simon task combined with an error detection task. Accounting for the positive relationship of mindfulness and emotional stability, our analyses revealed two opposing effects: a significant difference between the Ne/ERN amplitudes from detected and undetected errors was found for highly mindful participants as well as for participants with low emotional stability. These results suggest that the early error process for highly mindful participants already includes a distinction between aware and unaware errors. Moreover, low emotionally stable participants also showed higher Ne/ERN amplitudes after their aware errors than after their unaware errors, while there was no differentiation in amplitude regarding error awareness for highly emotionally stable participants. Future research should take emotional stability into account when reporting on trait mindfulness, because of possible opposing effects on performance monitoring.

Performance monitoring mechanisms activated before and after a response: A comparison of aware and unaware errors

The main goal of the current study was to investigate whether correct withholds, aware errors and unaware errors could be distinguished in terms of performance monitoring mechanisms activated before and after the response. To this end, an error awareness task (explicit acknowledgment of a performance error, expressed by pressing a specific button) was combined with the event-related potential (ERP) technique. Results regarding the performance monitoring mechanisms triggered before a response revealed faster responses before an aware error than before an unaware error. Likewise, analysis of the error-preceding positivity (EPP) revealed specific modulation in frontal scalp regions according to error type. This result shows that transient disengagement and/or inefficiency of the performance monitoring system relates specifically to one type of error.

Error-related brain activity and error awareness in an error classification paradigm

Error-related brain activity has been linked to error detection enabling adaptive behavioral adjustments. However, it is still unclear which role error awareness plays in this process. Here, we show that the error-related negativity (Ne/ERN), an event-related potential reflecting early error monitoring, is dissociable from the degree of error awareness. Participants responded to a target while ignoring two different incongruent distractors. After responding, they indicated whether they had committed an error, and if so, whether they had responded to one or to the other distractor. This error classification paradigm allowed distinguishing partially aware errors, (i.e., errors that were noticed but misclassified) and fully aware errors (i.e., errors that were correctly classified). The Ne/ERN was larger for partially aware errors than for fully aware errors. Whereas this speaks against the idea that the Ne/ERN foreshadows the degree of error awareness, it confirms the prediction of a computational model, which relates the Ne/ERN to post-response conflict. This model predicts that stronger distractor processing – a prerequisite of error classification in our paradigm – leads to lower post-response conflict and thus a smaller Ne/ERN. This implies that the relationship between Ne/ERN and error awareness depends on how error awareness is related to response conflict in a specific task. Our results further indicate that the Ne/ERN but not the degree of error awareness determines adaptive performance adjustments. Taken together, we conclude that the Ne/ERN is dissociable from error awareness and foreshadows adaptive performance adjustments. Our results suggest that the relationship between the Ne/ERN and error awareness is correlative and mediated by response conflict.

Joint effects of sensory feedback and interoceptive awareness on conscious error detection: Evidence from event related brain potentials

Error awareness has been argued to depend on sensory feedback and interoceptive awareness (IA) (Ullsperger, Harsay, Wessel, & Ridderinkhof, 2010). We recorded EEG while participants performed a speeded Go/No-Go task in which they signaled error commission. Visibility of the effector was manipulated, while IA was measured with a heartbeat perception task. The late Pe was larger for aware than unaware errors. The ERN was also found to be modulated by error awareness, but only when the hand was visible, suggesting that its sensitivity to error awareness depends on the availability of visual sensory feedback. Only when the response hand was visible, the late Pe amplitude to aware errors correlated with IA, suggesting that sensory feedback and IA synergistically contribute to the emergence of error awareness. These findings underscore the idea that several sources of information accumulate in time following action execution in order to enable errors to break through and reach awareness.

An aware error is a salient event: the anterior insula assigns salience to aware errors through interoceptive mechanisms

Event Abstract Back to Event An aware error is a salient event: the anterior insula assigns salience to aware errors through interoceptive mechanisms Elke Godefroid1*, Gilles Pourtois1 and Jan Wiersema1 1 Ghent University, Experimental, Clinical and Health Psychology, Belgium Background: To adequately respond to environmental demands, it is crucial to consciously detect the occurrence of errors (Ullsperger et al., 2010). The error positivity (Pe) has been linked to error awareness. Because errors usually signal the need for a change in behavior, they are deemed salient events. Accordingly, the salience network and more specifically the anterior insula (AI) is thought to underlie error awareness (Klein et al., 2013). The AI is also involved in interoceptive awareness (Critchley et al., 2004), suggesting that processing of autonomic bodily signals during error commission might significantly contribute to error awareness. Here, we investigated whether error awareness is associated with AI activity. We predicted the Pe to appear only after aware errors and to be related to AI activity. Additionally, we tested whether interoceptive awareness supports the emergence of error awareness and the Pe, as hypothesized before (Ullsperger et al., 2010). We expected the Pe amplitude to be dependent upon the extent of interoceptive awareness. Methods: High-density EEG was recorded while 21 adult participants completed a speeded Go/No-Go task, in which they were instructed to press an error-signaling button when they became aware of error commission. This enabled us to contrast aware and unaware errors. A heartbeat perception task was administered to assess interoceptive awareness (Pollatos et al., 2007). sLORETA was used to source localize the Pe. Results: Replicating earlier findings (Dhar et al., 2011), the Pe was generated after aware errors exclusively, with generators located in the AI. Moreover, participants who were more proficient at the heartbeat perception task showed larger Pe amplitudes to aware errors. Conclusions: These findings bolster the idea that interoceptive awareness contributes to error awareness, via modulations of the AI during the Pe. This mechanism could explain why aware errors are processed and perceived as salient events. Keywords: EEG, salience, error awareness, Pe, Interoceptive Awareness Conference: XII International Conference on Cognitive Neuroscience (ICON-XII), Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, 27 Jul - 31 Jul, 2014. Presentation Type: Poster Topic: Cognition and Executive Processes Citation: Godefroid E, Pourtois G and Wiersema J (2015). An aware error is a salient event: the anterior insula assigns salience to aware errors through interoceptive mechanisms. Conference Abstract: XII International Conference on Cognitive Neuroscience (ICON-XII). doi: 10.3389/conf.fnhum.2015.217.00197 Copyright: The abstracts in this collection have not been subject to any Frontiers peer review or checks, and are not endorsed by Frontiers. They are made available through the Frontiers publishing platform as a service to conference organizers and presenters. The copyright in the individual abstracts is owned by the author of each abstract or his/her employer unless otherwise stated. Each abstract, as well as the collection of abstracts, are published under a Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 (attribution) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) and may thus be reproduced, translated, adapted and be the subject of derivative works provided the authors and Frontiers are attributed. For Frontiers’ terms and conditions please see https://www.frontiersin.org/legal/terms-and-conditions. Received: 19 Feb 2015; Published Online: 24 Apr 2015. * Correspondence: Mrs. Elke Godefroid, Ghent University, Experimental, Clinical and Health Psychology, Ghent, Belgium, Elke.Godefroid@UGent.be Login Required This action requires you to be registered with Frontiers and logged in. To register or login click here. Abstract Info Abstract The Authors in Frontiers Elke Godefroid Gilles Pourtois Jan Wiersema Google Elke Godefroid Gilles Pourtois Jan Wiersema Google Scholar Elke Godefroid Gilles Pourtois Jan Wiersema PubMed Elke Godefroid Gilles Pourtois Jan Wiersema Related Article in Frontiers Google Scholar PubMed Abstract Close Back to top Javascript is disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser settings in order to see all the content on this page.

Error-Monitoring and Post-Error Compensations: Dissociation between Perceptual Failures and Motor Errors with and without Awareness

Whether humans adjust their behavior in response to unaware errors remains a controversial issue relevant to insight in neuropsychiatric conditions. Initial error awareness studies found that the error-related negativity (ERN), an event-related potential (ERP) originating in the medial prefrontal cortex after errors, activated equally for aware and unaware errors, suggesting a candidate preconscious mechanism. However, recent studies demonstrate that the ERN decreases after unaware errors. We hypothesized that the ERN is dependent upon awareness, and predicted that previous discrepancies might be due to unaware errors not being differentiated from perceptually uncertain, low-confidence responses that might increase the ERN amplitude. Here we addressed this hypothesis by distinguishing between aware errors, unaware errors, and uncertain responses, and using stimuli (faces) associated with well established sensory ERPs to evaluate the degree of stimulus processing for each trial type. We found that while aware and unaware errors were related to failures at the time of response, uncertain responses were due to failures at the time of stimulus processing indexed by lower amplitude sensory ERPs. Moreover, uncertain responses showed similar ERN activity as aware errors, in comparison with decreased activity for unaware errors. Finally, compared with aware errors, uncertain responses and unaware errors showed reduced neural compensations, such as alpha suppression. Together these findings suggest that the ERN is activated by aware motor errors as well as sensory failures, and that both awareness and certainty are necessary for neural adaptations after errors.

Metacognitive and online error awareness deficits after prefrontal cortex lesions

Awareness of deficits after brain injury represents a significant clinical and theoretical challenge, but relatively little is known about the neuroanatomical correlates of specific types of deficit awareness. We examined the awareness correlates of left versus right prefrontal cortex lesions in comparison to left and right posterior lesions including two types of awareness measures—metacognitive and online error monitoring. Frontal lobe frontal lesion patients exhibited impaired metacognitive awareness and also showed deficits in monitoring errors as they occurred. In addition, frontal lobe lesion patients also showed reduced autonomic response to aware errors. Online and metacognitive awareness were not, however, significantly correlated, suggesting that distinct neuroanatomical systems may underpin these two types of awareness deficit. We hypothesize that while metacognitive awareness depends on both left and right frontal regions, accurate moment-to-moment processing of errors depends more on the right than on the left prefrontal cortex.

Error-related anterior cingulate cortex activity and the prediction of conscious error awareness

Research examining the neural mechanisms associated with error awareness has consistently identified dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) activity as necessary but not predictive of conscious error detection. Two recent studies (Steinhauser and Yeung, 2010; Wessel et al., 2011) have found a contrary pattern of greater dorsal ACC (dACC) activity [in the form of the error-related negativity (ERN)] during detected errors, but suggested that the greater activity may instead reflect task influences (e.g., response conflict, error probability) and or individual variability (e.g., statistical power). We re-analyzed fMRI BOLD data from 56 healthy participants who had previously been administered the Error Awareness Task (EAT), a motor Go/No-go response inhibition task in which subjects make errors of commission of which they are aware (Aware errors), or unaware (Unaware errors). Consistent with previous data, the activity in a number of cortical regions was predictive of error awareness, including bilateral inferior parietal and insula cortices, however, in contrast to previous studies, including our own smaller sample studies using the same task, error-related dACC activity was significantly greater during aware errors when compared to unaware errors. While the significantly faster RT for aware errors (compared to unaware) was consistent with the hypothesis of higher response conflict increasing ACC activity, we could find no relationship between dACC activity and the error RT difference. The data suggests that error awareness is associated with error-related dACC activity but that the role of this activity is probably best understood in relation to the activity in other regions. Activity in the dACC may be important to conscious error detection, but it remains unclear what task and individual factors influence error awareness.

Is any awareness necessary for an Ne?

The Error-Related Negativity (Ne or ERN) is a reliable electrophysiological index of error processing, which has been found to be independent of whether a subject is aware of an error or not. A large Ne was equally seen after errors that were consciously detected (Aware errors) and those that were not (Unaware errors), compared to a small negativity for correct responses (CRN). This suggests a dissociation between an automatic, preconscious error processing mechanism and subjective evaluation. A common concern regarding this finding is that subjects could have been somewhat aware of their errors, but did not report them due to lack of confidence. Here we tested this possibility directly using a betting paradigm which allowed us to separate occasions in which the subjects were confident of their response and trials in which they were unsure. In a choice reaction time task, subjects directly judged the accuracy of each response (correct or error) and then bet on this judgment using a high, medium, or low amount of money. The bets were used to determine the level of confidence the subjects had of their response. The average across all subjects regardless of confidence (betting) measure replicated the reported finding of an equal Ne for Aware and Unaware errors which was larger than the CRN. However, when Ne measurement was confined to high confidence (high bet) trials in confident subjects, a prominent Ne was seen only for Aware errors, while confident Unaware errors (i.e., error trials on which subjects made high bets that they were correct) elicited a response that did not differ from the CRN elicited by truly correct answers. In contrast, for low confidence trials in unconfident subjects, an intermediate and equal Ne/CRN was elicited by Correct responses, Aware and Unaware errors. These results provide direct evidence that the Ne is related to error awareness, and suggest the amplitude of the Ne/CRN depends on individual differences in error reporting and confidence.

Error Awareness and Salience Processing in the Oddball Task: Shared Neural Mechanisms

A body of work suggests similarities in the way we become aware of an error and process motivationally salient events. Yet, evidence for a shared neural mechanism has not been provided. A within subject investigation of the brain regions involved in error awareness and salience processing has not been reported. While the neural response to motivationally salient events is classically studied during target detection after longer target-to-target intervals in an oddball task and engages a widespread insula-thalamo-cortical brain network, error awareness has recently been linked to, most prominently, anterior insula cortex. Here we explore whether the anterior insula activation for error awareness is related to salience processing, by testing for activation overlap in subjects undergoing two different task settings. Using a within subjects design, we show activation overlap in six major brain areas during aware errors in an antisaccade task and during target detection after longer target-to-target intervals in an oddball task: anterior insula, anterior cingulate, supplementary motor area, thalamus, brainstem, and parietal lobe. Within subject analyses shows that the insula is engaged in both error awareness and the processing of salience, and that the anterior insula is more involved in both processes than the posterior insula. The results of a fine-grained spatial pattern overlap analysis between active clusters in the same subjects indicates that even if the anterior insula is activated for both error awareness and salience processing, the two types of processes might tend to activate non-identical neural ensembles on a finer-grained spatial level. Together, these outcomes suggest a similar functional phenomenon in the two different task settings. Error awareness and salience processing share a functional anatomy, with a tendency toward subregional dorsal and ventral specialization within the anterior insula.

Cascade of Neural Events Leading from Error Commission to Subsequent Awareness Revealed Using EEG Source Imaging

The goal of the present study was to shed light on the respective contributions of three important action monitoring brain regions (i.e. cingulate cortex, insula, and orbitofrontal cortex) during the conscious detection of response errors. To this end, fourteen healthy adults performed a speeded Go/Nogo task comprising Nogo trials of varying levels of difficulty, designed to elicit aware and unaware errors. Error awareness was indicated by participants with a second key press after the target key press. Meanwhile, electromyogram (EMG) from the response hand was recorded in addition to high-density scalp electroencephalogram (EEG). In the EMG-locked grand averages, aware errors clearly elicited an error-related negativity (ERN) reflecting error detection, and a later error positivity (Pe) reflecting conscious error awareness. However, no Pe was recorded after unaware errors or hits. These results are in line with previous studies suggesting that error awareness is associated with generation of the Pe. Source localisation results confirmed that the posterior cingulate motor area was the main generator of the ERN. However, inverse solution results also point to the involvement of the left posterior insula during the time interval of the Pe, and hence error awareness. Moreover, consecutive to this insular activity, the right orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) was activated in response to aware and unaware errors but not in response to hits, consistent with the implication of this area in the evaluation of the value of an error. These results reveal a precise sequence of activations in these three non-overlapping brain regions following error commission, enabling a progressive differentiation between aware and unaware errors as a function of time elapsed, thanks to the involvement first of interoceptive or proprioceptive processes (left insula), later leading to the detection of a breach in the prepotent response mode (right OFC).

On the positive side of error processing: error‐awareness positivity revisited

Performance errors are indexed in the brain even if they are not consciously registered, as demonstrated by the error-related negativity (ERN or Ne) event-related potential. It has recently been shown that another response-locked potential, the error positivity (Pe), follows the Ne, but only in those trials in which the participants consciously detect making the error ('Aware Errors'). In the present study we generalize these findings to an auditory task and investigate possible caveats in the interpretation of the Pe as an index of error awareness. In an auditory Go/No-Go error-awareness task (auditory EAT) participants pressed an additional 'fix error' button after noticing that they had made an error. As in visual tasks, the Ne was similar for aware ('fixed') and unaware ('unfixed') errors, while the Pe was enhanced only for Aware Errors. Within subjects, the Ne and Pe behaved in similar fashions for auditory and visual errors. A control condition confirmed that the awareness effect was not due to the requirement to report error awareness. These results reinforce the evidence in favor of the Pe as a correlate of conscious error processing, and imply that this process is not modality-specific. Nevertheless, single-trial analysis suggested that the Pe may be a delayed P3b related to stimulus processing rather than to response monitoring.