Post-error Accuracy Research Articles

Neural and behavioral markers of inhibitory control predict symptom improvement during internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy for depression

Poor inhibitory control contributes to deficits in emotion regulation, which are often targeted by treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD), including cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). Brain regions that contribute to inhibitory control and emotion regulation overlap; thus, inhibitory control might relate to response to CBT. In this study, we examined whether baseline inhibitory control and resting state functional connectivity (rsFC) within overlapping emotion regulation-inhibitory control regions predicted treatment response to internet-based CBT (iCBT). Participants with MDD were randomly assigned to iCBT (N = 30) or a monitored attention control (MAC) condition (N = 30). Elastic net regression was used to predict post-treatment Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) scores from baseline variables, including demographic variables, PHQ-9 scores, Flanker effects (interference, sequential dependency, post-error slowing), and rsFC between the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, bilateral anterior insula (AI), and right temporoparietal junction (TPJ). Essential prognostic predictor variables retained in the elastic net regression included treatment group, gender, Flanker interference response time (RT), right AI-TPJ rsFC, and left AI-right AI rsFC. Prescriptive predictor variables retained included interactions between treatment group and baseline PHQ-9 scores, age, gender, Flanker RT, sequential dependency effects on accuracy, post-error accuracy, right AI-TPJ rsFC, and left AI-right AI rsFC. Inhibitory control and rsFC within inhibitory control-emotion regulation regions predicted reduced symptom severity following iCBT, and these effects were stronger in the iCBT group than in the MAC group. These findings contribute to a growing literature indicating that stronger inhibitory control at baseline predicts better outcomes to psychotherapy, including iCBT.

Decoding the task specificity of post-error adjustments: Features and determinants

Errors typically trigger post-error adjustments aimed at improving subsequent reactions within a single task, but little work has focused on whether these adjustments are task-general or task-specific across different tasks. We collected behavioral and electrophysiological (EEG) data when participants performed a psychological refractory period paradigm. This paradigm required them to complete Task 1 and Task 2 separated by a variable stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA). Behaviorally, post-error slowing and post-error accuracy exhibited task-general features at short SOAs but some task-specific features at long SOAs. EEG results manifest that task-general adjustments had a short-lived effect, whereas task-specific adjustments were long-lasting. Moreover, error awareness specifically conduced to the improvement of subsequent sensory processing and behavior performance in Task 1 (the task where errors occurred). These findings demonstrate that post-error adjustments rely on both transient, task-general interference and longer-lasting, task-specific control mechanisms simultaneously, with error awareness playing a crucial role in determining these mechanisms. We further discuss the contribution of central resources to the task specificity of post-error adjustments.

Anxiety Symptoms in Young Children Are Associated With a Maladaptive Neurobehavioral Profile of Error Responding

BackgroundChildhood anxiety symptoms have been linked to alterations in cognitive control and error processing, but the diverse findings on neural markers of anxiety in young children, which vary by severity and developmental stage, suggest the need for a wider perspective. Integrating new neural markers with established ones, such as the error-related negativity, the error positivity, and frontal theta, could clarify this association. Error-related alpha suppression (ERAS) is a recently proposed index of post-error attentional engagement that has not yet been explored in children with anxiety. MethodsTo identify neurobehavioral profiles of anxiety in young children by integrating ERAS with the error-related negativity, error positivity, frontal theta, and post-error performance indicators, we employed K-means clustering as an unsupervised multimetric approach. For this, we first aimed to confirm the presence and scalp distribution of ERAS in young children. We performed event-related potentials and spectral analysis of electroencephalogram data collected during a Go/NoGo task (Zoo Task) completed by 181 children (ages 4–7 years; 103 female) who were sampled from across the clinical-to-nonclinical range of anxiety severity using the Child Behavior Checklist. ResultsResults confirmed ERAS, showing lower post-error alpha power, maximal suppression at occipital sites, and less ERAS in younger children. K-means clustering revealed that high anxiety and younger age were associated with reduction in ERAS and frontal theta, less negative error-related negativity, enlarged error positivity, more post-error slowing, and reduced post-error accuracy. ConclusionsOur findings indicate a link between ERAS, maladaptive neural mechanisms of attention elicited by errors, and anxiety in young children, suggesting that anxiety may arise from or interfere with attention and error processing.

Examining post-error performance in a complex multitasking environment

Previous work on indices of error-monitoring strongly supports that errors are distracting and can deplete attentional resources. In this study, we use an ecologically valid multitasking paradigm to test post-error behavior. It was predicted that after failing an initial task, a subject re-presented with that task in conflict with another competing simultaneous task, would more likely miss their response opportunity for the competing task and stay ‘tunneled’ on the initially errored task. Additionally, we predicted that an error’s effect on attention would dissipate after several seconds, making error cascades less likely when subsequent conflict tasks are delayed. A multi-attribute task battery was used to present tasks and collect measures of both post-error and post-correct performance. Results supported both predictions: post-error accuracy on the competing task was lower compared to post-correct accuracy, and error-proportions were higher at shorter delays, dissipating over time. An exploratory analysis also demonstrated that following errors (as opposed to post-correct trials), participants clicked more on the task panel of the initial error regardless of delay; this continued task-engagement provides preliminary support for errors leading to a cognitive tunneling effect.

To err is human- to understand error-processing is divine: Contributions of working memory and anxiety to error-related brain and pupil responses.

Both anxiety and working memory capacity appear to predict increased (more negative) error-related negativity (ERN) amplitudes, despite being inversely related to one another. Until the interactive effects of these variables on the ERN are clarified, there may be challenges posed to our ability to use the ERN as an endophenotype for anxiety, as some have suggested. The compensatory error monitoring hypothesis suggests that high trait-anxiety individuals have larger ERN amplitudes because they must employ extra, compensatory efforts to override the working memory demands of their anxiety. Yet, to our knowledge, no ERN study has employed direct manipulation of working memory demands in conjunction with direct manipulations of induced (state) anxiety. Furthermore, little is known about how these manipulations affect other measures of error processing, such as the error-related pupil dilation response and post-error behavioral adjustments. Therefore, we manipulate working memory load and anxiety in a 2 × 2 within-subjects design to examine the interactive effects of working memory load and anxiety on ERN amplitude, error-related pupil dilation response amplitude, and post-error behavior. There were no effects of our manipulations on ERN amplitude, suggesting a strong interpretation of compensatory error-processing theory. However, our worry manipulation affected post-error behavior, such that worry caused a reduction in post-error accuracy. Additionally, our working memory manipulation affected error-related PDR magnitude and the amplitude of the error-related positivity (Pe), such that increased working memory load decreased the amplitude of these responses. Implications of these results within the context of the compensatory error processing framework are discussed.

EEG Dynamics of Error Processing and Associated Behavioral Adjustments in Preschool Children.

Preschool children show neural responses and make behavioral adjustments immediately following an error. However, there is a lack of evidence regarding how neural responses to error predict subsequent behavioral adjustments during childhood. The aim of our study was to explore the neural dynamics of error processing and associated behavioral adjustments in preschool children from unsatisfied basic needs (UBN) homes. Using EEG recordings during a go/no-go task, we examined within-subject associations between the error-related negativity (ERN), frontal theta power, post-error slowing, and post-error accuracy. Post-error accuracy increased linearly with post-error slowing, and there was no association between the neural activity of error processing and post-error accuracy. However, during successful error recovery, the frontal theta power, but not the ERN amplitude, was associated positively with post-error slowing. These findings indicated that preschool children from UBN homes adjusted their behavior following an error in an adaptive form and that the error-related theta activity may be associated with the adaptive forms of post-error behavior. Furthermore, our data support the adaptive theory of post-error slowing and point to some degree of separation between the neural mechanisms represented by the ERN and theta.

Post-error adjustments depend causally on executive attention: Evidence from an intervention study.

Detecting and correcting execution errors is crucial for safe and efficient goal-directed behavior. Despite intensive investigations on error processing, the cognitive foundations of this process remain unclear. Based on the presumed relation between executive attention (EA) and error processing, we implemented a seven-day EA intervention by adopting the Posner cueing paradigm to test the potential causal link from EA to error processing in healthy adults. The experimental group (high EA, HEA) was trained on the Posner cueing paradigm, with a ratio of invalid cue (IC) trials to valid cue (VC) trials of 5:1 and a corresponding ratio of 1:1 in the active control group (low EA, LEA). We found that the EA intervention improved EA across intervention sessions. Critically, after the EA intervention, the HEA group showed that post-error accuracy (PEA) was restored to the same level as the post-correct accuracy (in comparison with the LEA group). However, post-error slowing and the flanker effect were not modulated by the EA intervention. Furthermore, we observed that the changes in the accuracy of VC trials positively predicted the changes in PEA and that the two groups were classified according to the changes in PEA with a 61.3% accuracy. Based on these results, we propose that EA causally drives error processing. And the capabilities of the “actively catch” more attention resources and the automatic mismatch processing developed after EA intervention is transferable to error processing, thereby directly resulting in the gains in post-error adjustments. Our work informs the potential cognitive mechanisms underlying this causal link.

Decoding the Specificity of Post-Error Adjustments Using EEG-Based Multivariate Pattern Analysis.

Errors can elicit post-error adjustments that serve to optimize performance by preventing further errors. An essential but unsolved issue is that whether post-error adjustments are domain-general or domain-specific, which was investigated in the present study through eliciting different types of errors. Behavioral and electrophysiological data were recorded when male and female subjects performed the Eriksen flanker task. For this study, we examined the aforementioned issue by combining event-related potential and multivariate pattern analysis. The results indicated that post-error slowing, error-related negativity, and error positivity were comparable between congruent and incongruent errors, indicating that errors triggered domain-general interference mechanisms, whereas post-error accuracy and late positive potential elicited by incongruent errors were larger than those elicited by congruent errors, exhibiting domain-specific control adjustment mechanisms. Importantly, no successful decoding soon after errors was found between congruent and incongruent errors, but above-chance decoding was observed between these two types of errors with increasing time, which further support that domain-general adjustments occurred in the early stage, whereas domain-specific adjustments appeared in the late stage. Furthermore, brain-behavior correlation results suggested that the late post-error adjustments predicted subsequent behavior performance. Together, this study revealed that early domain-general interference adjustments induced by errors are reflected in error detection and error awareness, which are independent of error types; on the contrary, late domain-specific control adjustments are reflected in attentional adjustments, which are modulated by error types.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT To date, clear evidence on the specificity of post-error adjustments is lacking. The present study provides neurophysiological evidence that post-error adjustments simultaneously rely on both domain-general and domain-specific mechanisms. Event-related potential results indicated that domain-general adjustments were accompanied by the interference of error detection and error awareness. In contrast, domain-specific adjustments were associated with attentional adjustments. Multivariate pattern analysis further decoded the two features of post-error adjustments in the early stage matching the time patterns of error-related negativity and error positivity and in the late stage corresponding to the late positive potential. Temporal generalization analysis showed that domain-specific processing appeared stably in late post-error adjustments. Hence, we propose that post-error different stages may determine the specificity of post-error adjustments.

Learning from mistakes: Incidental encoding reveals a time-dependent enhancement of posterror target processing.

It has been known for >50 years that making an error leads to subsequent changes in performance, yet the exact nature of posterror adjustments in cognition remains debated. We posit that this is in large part due to traditional performance indices, like mean posterror response time and accuracy, being insensitive measures of trial-by-trial stimulus processing. To overcome this limitation, we devised a novel object flanker task that employed trial-unique target and distracter stimuli and was followed by a surprise recognition memory test. This allowed us to determine how errors influence incidental target and distracter encoding in a trial-specific manner. We used this approach to test the "adaptive orienting theory" of posterror processing, according to which an error triggers an initial inhibition of task processing-facilitating orienting to the error source-followed by a controlled retuning of attention to the task. To characterize the time-course of the posterror processing cascade, we combined our task with a manipulation of the response-stimulus interval (RSI), across four experiments (RSIs: 300 ms, 650 ms, ~1,000 ms; N = 96-100 per experiment). We document, for the first time, that making an error leads to a substantial (~10%) enhancement of target (but not distracter) memory on the subsequent trial, which interacts with RSI: Posterror targets were remembered better than postcorrect targets at the long (650 ms, ~1,000 ms) but not the short (300 ms) RSIs. These findings provide clear support for the adaptive orienting theory by demonstrating a novel cognitive phenomenon: a time-dependent posterror enhancement of target encoding (PETE). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Tasting rewards. Effects of orosensory sweet signals on human error processing

ABSTRACT Human research has shown interactions between rewards and cognitive control. In animal models of affective neuroscience, reward administration typically involves administering orosensory sugar signals (OSS) during caloric-deprived states. We adopted this procedure to investigate neurophysiological mechanisms of reward-cognitive control interactions in humans. We predicted that OSS would affect neurophysiological and behavioral indices of error processing oppositely, depending on the relative weight of the OSS-induced ‘wanting’ and ‘liking’ components of reward. We, therefore, conducted a double-blind, non-nutritive sweetener-controlled study with a within-subject design. Fasted (16 hr) participants (N = 61) performed a modified Flanker task to assess neurophysiological (error-related negativity [Ne/ERN]) and behavioral (post-error adaptations) measures of error processing. Non-contingent to task performance, we repeatedly administered either a sugar (glucose) or non-nutritive sweetener (aspartame) solution, which had to be expulsed after short oral stimulation to prevent post-oral effects. Consistent with our hypothesis on how ‘liking’ would affect Ne/ERN amplitude, we found the latter to be decreased for sugar compared to aspartame. Unexpectedly, we found post-error accuracy, instead of post-error slowing, to be reduced by sugar relative to aspartame. Our findings suggest that OSS may interact with error processing through the ‘liking’ component of rewards. Adopting our reward-induction procedure (i.e. administering OSS in a state of high reward sensitivity [i.e. fasting], non-contingent to task performance) might help future research investigating the neural underpinnings of reward-cognitive control interactions in humans.

The relationship between childhood stress and distinct stages of dynamic behavior monitoring in adults: neural and behavioral correlates.

Childhood adversity is a major risk factor for emotional and cognitive disorders later in adulthood. Behavior monitoring, one of the most important components of cognitive control, plays a crucial role in flexible interaction with the environment. Here, we test a novel conceptual model discriminating between two distinct dimensions of childhood adversity (i.e. deprivation and threat) and examine their relations to dynamic stages of behavior monitoring. Sixty young healthy adults participated in this study using event-related potentials and the dynamic stages of behavior monitoring including response inhibition, error detection and post-error adjustments were investigated in a classical Go/NoGo task. Multiple regression analyses revealed that participants with higher severity of childhood adversity recruited more controlled attention, as indicated by larger (more negative) conflict detection–related NoGo-N2 amplitudes and larger (more negative) error detection–related error-related negativity amplitudes. Higher severity of childhood abuse (an indicator of threat) was related to smaller (less positive) error appraisal–related error positivity amplitudes on the neural level and subsequently lower post-error accuracy on the behavioral level. These results suggested that prefrontal-supported controlled attention is influenced by universal adversity in childhood while the error-related behavioral adjustment is mainly affected by childhood abuse, indicating the dimensions of deprivation and threat are at least partially distinct.

Subthreshold error corrections predict adaptive post-error compensations.

Relatively little is known about the relation between subthreshold error corrections and post-error behavioral compensations. The present study utilized lateralized beta power, which has been shown to index response preparation, to examine subthreshold error corrections in a task known to produce response conflict, the Simon task. We found that even when an overt correction is not made, greater activation of the corrective response, indexed by beta suppression ipsilateral to the initial responding hand, predicted post-error speeding, and enhanced post-error accuracy at the single-trial level. This provides support for the notion that response conflict associated with errors can be adaptive, and suggests that subthreshold corrections should be taken into account to fully understand error-monitoring processes. Furthermore, we expand on previous findings that demonstrate that post-error slowing and post-error accuracy can be dissociated, as well as findings that suggest that frontal midline theta oscillations and the error-related negativity (ERN) are dissociable neurocognitive processes.

Contrasting time and frequency domains: ERN and induced theta oscillations differentially predict post-error behavior.

The present study investigated the neural dynamics of error processing in both the time and frequency domains, as well as associated behavioral phenomena, at the single-trial level. We used a technique that enabled us to separately investigate the evoked and induced aspects of the EEG signal (Cohen & Donner, 2013, Journal of Neurophysiology, 110[12], 2752-2763). We found that at the single-trial level, while the (evoked) error-related negativity (ERN) predicted only post-error slowing (PES)-and only when errors occurred on incongruent trials-induced frontal midline theta power served as a robust predictor of both PES and post-error accuracy (PEA) regardless of stimulus congruency. Mediation models of both electrophysiological indices demonstrated that although the relationship between theta and PEA was mediated by PES, there was not a relationship between the ERN and PEA. Our data suggest that although the ERN and frontal midline theta index functionally related underlying cognitive processes, they are not simply the same process manifested in different domains. In addition, our findings are consistent with the adaptive theory of post-error slowing, as PES was positively associated with post-error accuracy at the single-trial level. More generally, our study provides additional support for the inclusion of a time-frequency approach to better understand the role of medial frontal cortex in action monitoring.

N-Back Task Training Helps to Improve Post-error Performance.

Improved performance on working memory (WM) through training has been widely expected to transfer to other domains. Recent studies have proposed that WM training could enhance the autonomous coordination of WM processes. Based on the shared processes between WM and error processing, our present study explored the transfer effect of 15 days of training on post-error performance, during the n-back task, compared to a simple visual search task. Participants were randomly assigned to either the training (N = 22) or control (N = 18) group. We found that WM training successfully improved WM performance. After training, compared with the control group, the training group showed a significant reduction in post-error slowing (PES); however, post-error accuracy and the flanker effect were not modulated by WM training. Moreover, we observed a significant, negative correlation between the changes in PES and WM from pretest to posttest and classified two groups based on these changes in PES with 70% accuracy. Thus, in our present sample, WM training improved post-error performance. We propose that the skill of controlling information flow, developed during WM training, is transferable to other tasks and discuss the implications of current findings for understanding the generation of PES.

Response time distribution parameters show posterror behavioral adjustment in mental arithmetic

After making an error, we usually slow down before our next response. This phenomenon is known as the posterror slowing (PES) effect. It has been interpreted to be an indicator of posterror behavioral adjustments and, therefore, has been linked to cognitive control. However, contradictory findings regarding PES and posterror accuracy cast doubt on such a relation. To determine whether behavior is adjusted after making an error, we investigated other features of behavior, such as the distribution of response times (RT) in a mental arithmetic task. Participants performed an arithmetic task with (Experiments 1 and 2) and without (Experiment 1) an accuracy-tracking procedure. On both tasks, participants responded more slowly and less accurately after errors. However, the RT distribution was more symmetrical on posterror trials compared to postcorrect trials, suggesting that a change in processing mode occurred after making an error, thus linking cognitive control to error monitoring, even in cases when accuracy decreased after errors. These findings expand our understanding on how posterror behavior is adjusted in mental arithmetic, and we propose that the measures of the RT distribution can be further used in other domains of error-monitoring research.

An adaptive orienting theory of error processing.

The ability to detect and correct action errors is paramount to safe and efficient goal-directed behaviors. Existing work on the neural underpinnings of error processing and post-error behavioral adaptations has led to the development of several mechanistic theories of error processing. These theories can be roughly grouped into adaptive and maladaptive theories. While adaptive theories propose that errors trigger a cascade of processes that will result in improved behavior after error commission, maladaptive theories hold that error commission momentarily impairs behavior. Neither group of theories can account for all available data, as different empirical studies find both impaired and improved post-error behavior. This article attempts a synthesis between the predictions made by prominent adaptive and maladaptive theories. Specifically, it is proposed that errors invoke a nonspecific cascade of processing that will rapidly interrupt and inhibit ongoing behavior and cognition, as well as orient attention toward the source of the error. It is proposed that this cascade follows all unexpected action outcomes, not just errors. In the case of errors, this cascade is followed by error-specific, controlled processing, which is specifically aimed at (re)tuning the existing task set. This theory combines existing predictions from maladaptive orienting and bottleneck theories with specific neural mechanisms from the wider field of cognitive control, including from error-specific theories of adaptive post-error processing. The article aims to describe the proposed framework and its implications for post-error slowing and post-error accuracy, propose mechanistic neural circuitry for post-error processing, and derive specific hypotheses for future empirical investigations.

The power of frontal midline theta and post‐error slowing to predict performance recovery: Evidence for compensatory mechanisms

Past studies utilizing cognitive control tasks have noted that trials following errors are characterized by slowed reaction time. Despite the assumption long held by researchers that this slowing is compensatory (in the service of post-error performance recovery), studies consistently show that post-error trials are no more accurate than post-correct trials. As a result, it has recently been proposed that post-error slowing (PES) is merely part of an orienting response that serves no task-relevant cognitive control purpose. Frontal midline theta (FMθ) oscillations represent another potential compensatory mechanism serving cognitive control processes, yet past studies relying on ERPs have failed to find an association between FMθ and post-error accuracy. The present study investigated the potentially adaptive role of PES and FMθ oscillations during a flanker task using trial-by-trial comparisons. Results indicated that error-related FMθ oscillations signal the need for enhanced top-down cognitive control and that PES supports cognitive control by providing the added time needed to achieve greater confidence in judgment. Overall, findings provide convergent evidence that both error-related FMθ and PES predict performance recovery following errors.

Post-error response inhibition in high math-anxious individuals: Evidence from a multi-digit addition task

The aim of the study was to investigate how high math-anxious (HMA) individuals react to errors in an arithmetic task. Twenty HMA and 19 low math-anxious (LMA) individuals were presented with a multi-digit addition verification task and were given response feedback. Post-error adjustment measures (response time and accuracy) were analyzed in order to study differences between groups when faced with errors in an arithmetical task. Results showed that both HMA and LMA individuals were slower to respond following an error than following a correct answer. However, post-error accuracy effects emerged only for the HMA group, showing that they were also less accurate after having committed an error than after giving the right answer. Importantly, these differences were observed only when individuals needed to repeat the same response given in the previous trial. These results suggest that, for HMA individuals, errors caused reactive inhibition of the erroneous response, facilitating performance if the next problem required the alternative response but hampering it if the response was the same. This stronger reaction to errors could be a factor contributing to the difficulties that HMA individuals experience in learning math and doing math tasks.

Neural evidence for enhanced attention to mistakes among school-aged children with a growth mindset

Individuals who believe intelligence is malleable (a growth mindset) are better able to bounce back from failures than those who believe intelligence is immutable. Event-related potential (ERP) studies among adults suggest this resilience is related to increased attention allocation to errors. Whether this mechanism is present among young children remains unknown, however. We therefore evaluated error-monitoring ERPs among 123 school-aged children while they completed a child-friendly go/no-go task. As expected, higher attention allocation to errors (indexed by larger error positivity, Pe) predicted higher post-error accuracy. Moreover, replicating adult work, growth mindset was related to greater attention to mistakes (larger Pe) and higher post-error accuracy. Exploratory moderation analyses revealed that growth mindset increased post-error accuracy for children who did not attend to their errors. Together, these results demonstrate the combined role of growth mindset and neural mechanisms of attention allocation in bouncing back after failure among young children.

The alertness level influences post-error adjustments

Post-error adjustment indicates that individuals execute a chain of adjustments after committing errors to reduce the likelihood of repeating an error, which is important for our survival and evolution. It includes post-error slowing (PES), post-error improvement in accuracy (PIA), and post-error reduction of interference (PERI) three types. However, there are still intensive disputes about the generation mechanisms of the post-error adjustment. The cognitive control account suggests that errors are associated with the error monitoring and a subsequent intensification of top-down control. After committing an error, the error signal will initiate cognitive control mechanisms to improve subsequent performance by activating the anterior cingulate cortex. In this case, increased cognitive control enables flexible recruitment of attentional resources to the goal-related dimension in the subsequent task. However, the orienting account assumes that the infrequent events can easily capture the attentional resources, and thus participants need to take more time to reorient the subsequent task. The remaining resources will be insufficient to perform effectively the subsequent task, behaving as decreased post-error accuracy. Therefore, how the attention influences the post-error adjustment remains unclear. To address the above issue, we first employed an attention network test (ANT) to evaluate the attention function of each participant. The ANT task was developed to measure the efficiency of the attentional networks including alerting, orienting and executive control through a simple cue (asterisk) and arrow Flanker task. There were four cue conditions: no cue, center cue, double cue, and spatial cue. In the no cue condition, only the fixation cross was presented in the center of the screen. In the center cue condition, an asterisk was presented in the center of the screen. In the double cue and spatial cue conditions, the fixation cross was always presented in the center of the screen. However, for the double cue condition, two asterisks were presented simultaneously at two possible target positions; for the spatial cue condition, an asterisk was presented at the target position. Additionally, the efficiency of alerting was defined as RT no cue– RT double cue, the efficiency of orienting was defined as RT center cue– RT spatial cue, and the efficiency of executive control was defined as RT incongruent– RT congruent. Then, we employed a letter Flanker task to examine the participants’ performance in the post-error trials. PES was calculated by the RT of correct trials following errors minus the RT of correct trials following correct responses. PIA was calculated by the accuracy following errors minus the accuracy following correct response. And PERI was calculated by the interference magnitude ( RT incongruent– RT congruent) following correct responses minus the interference magnitude following errors. To investigate which function of the attentional network influences the post-error adjustment, we correlated the scores of alerting, orienting and executive control with PES, PIA, and PERI, respectively. Finally, based on the correlation result, we grouped the participants as high altering level group (32% participants) and low alerting level group (32% participants) to further examine the individual difference in the post-error adjustment. As a result, we found that only the alerting score was negatively correlated with PES and PIA. Moreover, in the individual difference analysis, we found that the PES was only observed in the low alerting level group, but this effect was absent in the high alerting level group. For the PIA, there was no significant difference between two groups. These results may suggest that the alerting function plays an important role in the post-error adjustments, especially for the PES. High alerting level group has an advantage on enhanced alertness; they accordingly complete post-error adjustment with high efficiency.