Altered cingulate sub-region activation accounts for task-related dissociation in ERN amplitude as a function of obsessive-compulsive symptoms
Open accessAbstract
Larger error-related negativities (ERNs) have been consistently found in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) patients, and are thought to reflect the activities of a hyperactive cortico-striatal circuit during action monitoring. We previously observed that obsessive-compulsive (OC) symptomatic students (non-patients) have larger ERNs during errors in a response competition task, yet smaller ERNs in a reinforcement learning task. The finding of a task-specific dissociation suggests that distinct yet partially overlapping medio-frontal systems underlie the ERN in different tasks, and that OC symptoms are associated with functional differences in these systems. Here, we used EEG source localization to identify why OC symptoms are associated with hyperactive ERNs to errors yet hypoactive ERNs when selecting maladaptive actions. At rest, OC symptomatology predicted greater activity in rostral anterior cingulate cortex (rACC) and lower activity in dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC). When compared to a group with low OC symptom scores, the high OC group had greater rACC reactivity during errors in the response competition task and less deactivation of dACC activity during errors in the reinforcement learning task. The degree of activation in these areas correlated with ERN amplitudes during both tasks in the high OC group, but not in the low group. Interactive anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) systems associated avoidance of maladaptive actions were intact in the high OC group, but were related to poorer performance on a third task: probabilistic reversal learning. These novel findings link both tonic and phasic activities in the ACC to action monitoring alterations, including dissociation in performance deficits, in OC symptomatic participants.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
During probabilistic learning, high-OC participants showed disrupted reciprocal dorsal-rostral ACC patterns, indicating that similar behavioural performance may be supported by different neural mechanisms in individuals with greater obsessive-compulsive symptoms.
“During probabilistic learning, high-OC participants showed disrupted reciprocal dorsal–rostral ACC patterns, indicating that similar behavioural performance may be supported by different neural mechanisms in individuals with greater obsessive–compulsive symptoms [48].”
In high obsessive-compulsive symptom groups, flanker ERN was associated not only with dorsal ACC activity, but also with rostral ACC activity.
“In high obsessive–compulsive symptom groups, flanker ERN was associated not only with dorsal ACC activity, but also with rostral ACC activity [48].”
In standard flanker tasks, obsessive-compulsive symptoms were often associated with enlarged ERN or dERN amplitudes.
“In standard flanker tasks, obsessive–compulsive symptoms were often associated with enlarged ERN or dERN amplitudes, consistent with exaggerated monitoring of clear motor-response errors [35,48].”
Other studies found that higher obsessive-compulsive symptoms were associated with smaller ERN or dERN amplitudes following suboptimal choices.
“Others found that higher obsessive–compulsive symptoms were associated with smaller ERN or dERN amplitudes following suboptimal choices [35,48].”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 62 · Cited by 54
- Authors
- Cavanagh, J. F., Gründler, T. O. J., Frank, M. J., & Allen, J. J. B.
- Affiliations
- University of Arizona (US)
- Brown University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Cavanagh, James F.
- Venue
- Neuropsychologia
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2010-06
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 2098-2109
- ISSN
- 0028-3932 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC2876228
- OpenAlex
- W2128098397
- Cited by
- 54
- References
- 62
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 5.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Neuropsychologia (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (submittedVersion)
- MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH066902, F31MH082560)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
- Keywords
- error-related negativity, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, anterior cingulate cortex, rostral anterior cingulate cortex, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, action monitoring, corticostriatal circuits, reinforcement learning, probabilistic reversal learning, EEG source localization
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Analysis of Variance, Brain Mapping, Choice Behavior, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Female, Gyrus Cinguli, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Probability Learning, Statistics as Topic, Young Adult
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