Cited by 314Neural dynamics and brain functionNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces

Theta EEG dynamics of the error-related negativity

Trujillo, Logan T., Allen, John J.B.·2007·Clinical Neurophysiology

Abstract

Objective The error-related negativity (ERN) is a response-locked brain potential (ERP) occurring 80-100ms following response errors. This report contrasts three views of the genesis of the ERN, testing the classic view that time-locked phasic bursts give rise to the ERN against the view that the ERN arises from a pure phase-resetting of ongoing theta (4-7Hz) EEG activity and the view that the ERN is generated - at least in part - by a phase-resetting and amplitude enhancement of ongoing theta EEG activity. Methods Time-domain ERP analyses were augmented with time-frequency investigations of phase-locked and non-phase-locked spectral power, and inter-trial phase coherence (ITPC) computed from individual EEG trials, examining time courses and scalp topographies. Simulations based on the assumptions of the classic, pure phase-resetting, and phase-resetting plus enhancement views, using parameters from each subject's empirical data, were used to contrast the time-frequency findings that could be expected if one or more of these hypotheses adequately modeled the data. Results Error responses produced larger amplitude activity than correct responses in time-domain ERPs immediately following responses, as expected. Time-frequency analyses revealed that significant error-related post-response increases in total spectral power (phase- and non-phase-locked), phase-locked power, and ITPC were primarily restricted to the theta range, with this effect located over midfrontocentral sites,…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.clinph.2006.11.009

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Trujillo, L. T., & Allen, J. J. B.
Affiliations
University of Arizona (US)
Corresponding author
  • Trujillo, Logan T.
  • Allen, John J.B.
Venue
Clinical Neurophysiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-03
Volume
118
Issue
3
Pages
645-668
ISSN
1388-2457 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2147583576
Cited by
314
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 10
FWCI
4.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Clinical Neurophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Keywords
EEG, error-related negativity, theta oscillations, phase resetting, phase locking, inter-trial phase coherence, error processing, response errors, frontal midline theta, action regulation
MeSH terms
Computer Simulation, Contingent Negative Variation, Cortical Synchronization, Electroencephalography, Humans, Mathematics, Theta Rhythm

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review