Cited by 2,567Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFree Will and AgencyEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces

Influence of cognitive control and mismatch on the N2 component of the ERP: A review

Open access
Folstein, Jonathan R., Van Petten, Cyma·2008·Psychophysiology

Abstract

Recent years have seen an explosion of research on the N2 component of the event-related potential, a negative wave peaking between 200 and 350 ms after stimulus onset. This research has focused on the influence of "cognitive control," a concept that covers strategic monitoring and control of motor responses. However, rich research traditions focus on attention and novelty or mismatch as determinants of N2 amplitude. We focus on paradigms that elicit N2 components with an anterior scalp distribution, namely, cognitive control, novelty, and sequential matching, and argue that the anterior N2 should be divided into separate control- and mismatch-related subcomponents. We also argue that the oddball N2 belongs in the family of attention-related N2 components that, in the visual modality, have a posterior scalp distribution. We focus on the visual modality for which components with frontocentral and more posterior scalp distributions can be readily distinguished.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00602.x

Cites

194 of 194 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Folstein, J. R., & Van Petten, C. (2004). Multidimensional rule, unidi- mensional rule, and similarity strategies in categorization: Event-re- lated potential correlates. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 1026-1044.
  2. Gehring, W. J., & Willoughby, A. R. (2004). Are all medial frontal negativities created equal? Toward a richer empirical basis for theories of action monitoring. In M. Ullsperger & M. Falkenstein (Eds.), Errors, conflicts, and the brain: Current opinions on performance mon- itoring. Leipzig: MPI of Cognitive Neuroscience.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Folstein, J. R., & Van Petten, C.
Affiliations
University of Arizona (US)
Corresponding author
Folstein, Jonathan R.
Venue
Psychophysiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-09-10
Volume
45
Issue
1
Pages
152-170
ISSN
  • 0048-5772 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8986
OpenAlex
W2132340226
Cited by
2,567
References
194
Citations by year
2026: 180 · 2025: 158 · 2024: 160 · 2023: 136 · 2022: 154 · 2021: 176 · 2020: 180 · 2019: 168 · 2018: 235 · 2017: 149 · 2016: 142 · 2015: 119 · 2014: 130 · 2013: 145 · 2012: 100
FWCI
3.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (MH073703, R03MH073703)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Free Will and Agency
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Keywords
N2 component, event-related potentials, cognitive control, novelty detection, mismatch negativity, oddball paradigm, sequential matching, attention, visual modality, scalp distribution
MeSH terms
Animals, Cognition, Evoked Potentials, Humans, Psychomotor Performance, Feedback, Psychological

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