The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Event‐related brain potentials and error‐related processing: An analysis of incorrect responses to go and no‐go stimuli
Abstract
Recent research has suggested that there is a component of the event‐related brain potential, the error‐related negativity (ERN), that is associated with error detection and remedial actions such as error inhibition, immediate error correction, or error compensation. The present experiment used a go/no‐go task to define more precisely the functional significance of this component. In this task, an ERN was observed for incorrect responses on go trials (errors of choice) and for response on no‐go trials (errors of action). Because errors of action cannot be corrected immediately by executing another response, these results indicate that the process manifested by the ERN is not dependent on immediate error correction. Other aspects of the data converge in suggesting that the ERN process is more U related to error detection and that the connections between detection and remedial actions may depend on the task situation.
Overview
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
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A new method for off-line removal of ocular artifact
Gratton, G., Coles, M. G. H., & Donchin, E. (1983) · Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/0013-4694(83)90135-9 · Cited by 5,055
Self-citationSpeaking: From Intention to Articulation
Levelt, W. J. M. (1989) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/6393.001.0001 · Cited by 4,804
Dimensional overlap: cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility-a model and taxonomy
Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.97.2.253 · Cited by 1,970
Falkenstein, M., Hohnsbein, J., Hoormann, J., & Blanke, L. (1991) · Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/0013-4694(91)90062-9 · Cited by 1,706
Cited by
Conflict monitoring and cognitive control
Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.108.3.624 · Cited by 7,351
Cognitive and emotional influences in anterior cingulate cortex
Bush, G., Luu, P., & Posner, M. I. (2000) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(00)01483-2 · Cited by 6,259
The neural basis of error detection: Conflict monitoring and the error-related negativity
Yeung, N., Botvinick, M. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2004) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.111.4.931 · Cited by 1,924
Miltner, W. H. R., Braun, C. H., & Coles, M. G. H. (1997) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/jocn.1997.9.6.788 · Cited by 1,530
Self-citationERP components on reaction errors and their functional significance: A tutorial
Falkenstein, M., Hoormann, J., Christ, S., & Hohnsbein, J. (2000) · Biological Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0301-0511(99)00031-9 · Cited by 1,442
Metadata
- Authors
- Scheffers, M. K., Coles, M. G. H., Bernstein, P., Gehring, W. J., & Donchin, E.
- Venue
- Psychophysiology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1996-01
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 42-53
- ISSN
- 0048-5772 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-8986
- OpenAlex
- W2153190011
- Cited by
- 308
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 3.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
