Cited by 179Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Error-related brain activity in the age of RDoC: A review of the literature

Weinberg, Anna, Dieterich, Raoul, Riesel, Anja·2015·International Journal of Psychophysiology

Abstract

The ability to detect and respond to errors is critical to successful adaptation to a changing environment. The error-related negativity (ERN), an event-related potential (ERP) component, is a well-validated neural response to errors and reflects the error monitoring activity of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). Additionally, the ERN is implicated in several processes key to adaptive functioning. Abnormalities in error-related brain activity have been linked to multiple forms of psychopathology and individual differences. As such, the component is likely to be useful in NIMH's Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) initiative to establish biologically-meaningful dimensions of psychological dysfunction, and currently appears as a unit of measurement in three RDoC domains: Positive Valence Systems, Negative Valence Systems, and Cognitive Systems. In this review paper, we introduce the ERN and discuss evidence related to its psychometric properties, as well as important task differences. Following this, we discuss evidence linking the ERN to clinically diverse forms of psychopathology, as well as the implications of one unit of measurement appearing in multiple RDoC dimensions. And finally, we discuss important future directions, as well as research pathways by which the ERN might be leveraged to track the ways in which dysfunctions in multiple neural systems interact to influence psychological well-being.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2015.02.029

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
Weinberg, A., Dieterich, R., & Riesel, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Illinois Chicago (US)
  • Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (DE)
Corresponding author
Weinberg, Anna
Venue
International Journal of Psychophysiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-11
Volume
98
Issue
2
Pages
276-299
ISSN
0167-8760 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1990283973
Cited by
179
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1
FWCI
1.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Psychophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
error-related negativity, error monitoring, anterior cingulate cortex, Research Domain Criteria, event-related potentials, psychopathology, individual differences, positive valence systems, negative valence systems, cognitive systems, psychometric properties, task differences
MeSH terms
Brain, Brain Mapping, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Humans, Reaction Time

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