CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 445Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 164 of the 165 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

On the relationship between anxiety and error monitoring: a meta-analysis and conceptual framework

Open access
Moser, Jason S., Moran, Tim P., Schroder, Hans S., Donnellan, M. Brent, Yeung, Nick·2013·Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00466PMC PMC3744033
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Research involving event-related brain potentials has revealed that anxiety is associated with enhanced error monitoring, as reflected in increased amplitude of the error-related negativity (ERN). The nature of the relationship between anxiety and error monitoring is unclear, however. Through meta-analysis and a critical review of the literature, we argue that anxious apprehension/worry is the dimension of anxiety most closely associated with error monitoring. Although, overall, anxiety demonstrated a robust, "small-to-medium" relationship with enhanced ERN (r = -0.25), studies employing measures of anxious apprehension show a threefold greater effect size estimate (r = -0.35) than those utilizing other measures of anxiety (r = -0.09). Our conceptual framework helps explain this more specific relationship between anxiety and enhanced ERN and delineates the unique roles of worry, conflict processing, and modes of cognitive control. Collectively, our analysis suggests that enhanced ERN in anxiety results from the interplay of a decrease in processes supporting active goal maintenance and a compensatory increase in processes dedicated to transient reactivation of task goals on an as-needed basis when salient events (i.e., errors) occur.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00466

Cites

164 of 164 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 ERN Waveform and Voltage Map. Neural activity recorded in the post-response period during a flanker task. Response-locked waveform is presented on the left. Dashed line: the ERN is shown as the negative deflection peaking at approximately 50 ms; the ERN is followed by a broad, positive deflection—the error-positivity. Solid line: the CRN is the correct-response counterpart to the ERN. It shows a similar time course and scalp distribution. A voltage map depicting the scalp distribution of the ERN is presented on the right. It shows that the ERN is primarily a fronto-centrally maximal negativity.
Figure 1 ERN Waveform and Voltage Map. Neural activity recorded in the post-response period during a flanker task. Response-locked waveform is presented on the left. Dashed line: the ERN is shown as the negative deflection peaking at approximately 50 ms; the ERN is followed by a broad, positive deflection—the error-positivity. Solid line: the CRN is the correct-response counterpart to the ERN. It shows a similar time course and scalp distribution. A voltage map depicting the scalp distribution of the ERN is presented on the right. It shows that the ERN is primarily a fronto-centrally maximal negativity.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Selection of studies. Flow chart depicting the selection of studies used in the meta-analysis.
Figure 2 Selection of studies. Flow chart depicting the selection of studies used in the meta-analysis.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 ERN forest. A forest plot depicting effect sizes (r) between the ERN and measures of anxiety for the meta-analytic average (top), the anxious apprehension and mixed anxiety averages, and individual studies. Error bars depict the 95% confidence interval for the effect size. The dotted line indicates an effect size of 0.
Figure 3 ERN forest. A forest plot depicting effect sizes (r) between the ERN and measures of anxiety for the meta-analytic average (top), the anxious apprehension and mixed anxiety averages, and individual studies. Error bars depict the 95% confidence interval for the effect size. The dotted line indicates an effect size of 0.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 CRN forest. A forest plot depicting effect sizes (r) between the CRN and measures of anxiety for the meta-analytic average (top) and individual studies. Error bars depict the 95% confidence interval for the effect size. The dotted line indicates an effect size of 0.
Figure 4 CRN forest. A forest plot depicting effect sizes (r) between the CRN and measures of anxiety for the meta-analytic average (top) and individual studies. Error bars depict the 95% confidence interval for the effect size. The dotted line indicates an effect size of 0.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5 ΔERN forest. A forest plot depicting effect sizes (r) between the ΔERN and measures of anxiety for the meta-analytic average (top), the anxious apprehension and mixed anxiety averages, and individual studies. Error bars depict the 95% confidence interval for the effect size. The dotted line indicates an effect size of 0.
Figure 5 ΔERN forest. A forest plot depicting effect sizes (r) between the ΔERN and measures of anxiety for the meta-analytic average (top), the anxious apprehension and mixed anxiety averages, and individual studies. Error bars depict the 95% confidence interval for the effect size. The dotted line indicates an effect size of 0.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 6 Working memory load enhances ERN. (Top Left) SWPs elicited during the memory retention interval. (Top Right) Response-locked ERPs as a function of accuracy and WML. (Bottom) A scatterplot depicting the association between WM-related changes in SWPs and ERNs.
Figure 6 Working memory load enhances ERN. (Top Left) SWPs elicited during the memory retention interval. (Top Right) Response-locked ERPs as a function of accuracy and WML. (Bottom) A scatterplot depicting the association between WM-related changes in SWPs and ERNs.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 7 Relationship between ERN and GPA is moderated by worry. (Top) Scatterplot showing the relationship between ERN and GPA in the top 50% of the PSWQ distribution (black) and the bottom 50% (gray). (Bottom) Bar graph depicting GPA as a function of ERN and Worry groups which were created by median splits and described in the text. Error bars represent standard error of the mean.
Figure 7 Relationship between ERN and GPA is moderated by worry. (Top) Scatterplot showing the relationship between ERN and GPA in the top 50% of the PSWQ distribution (black) and the bottom 50% (gray). (Bottom) Bar graph depicting GPA as a function of ERN and Worry groups which were created by median splits and described in the text. Error bars represent standard error of the mean.CC BY · PubMed Central

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.

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.

Citations

Cites

Show all 165 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Barlow D. H. (2002). Anxiety and Its Disorders, 2nd Edn. New York, NY: Guilford Press
  2. Matthews G. Joyner J. Gililand K. Campbell S. E. Faulconner S. (1999). Validation of a comprehensive stress state questionnaire: towards a state “Big three”? in Handbook of Coping: Theory, Research, and Applications, eds Mervielde I. Deary I. J. De Fruyt F. Ostendorf F. (Tilburg, NL: Tilburg University Press), 333– 350
  3. Moran T. P. Moser J. S. (2012). Working memory load enhances action monitoring: implications for the study of anxiety, in Poster presented at the 52nd Annual Conference for the Society for Psychophysiological Research, (New Orleans, LA).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 445

Related

Metadata

Authors
Moser, J. S., Moran, T. P., Schroder, H. S., Donnellan, M. B., & Yeung, N.
Affiliations
  • Michigan State University (US)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
Corresponding author
Moser, Jason S.
ORCID
Venue
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2013
Volume
7
Pages
466-466
ISSN
1662-5161 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/fnhum.2013.00466
PMC
PMC3744033
OpenAlex
W2008540085
Cited by
445
References
165
Citations by year
2026: 31 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 48 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 1
FWCI
2.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Human Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Keywords
anxiety, error monitoring, error-related negativity, event-related potentials, anxious apprehension, worry, conflict processing, cognitive control, goal maintenance

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