Cited by 38Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFree Will and AgencyMotor Control and Adaptation

When the rules are reversed: action-monitoring consequences of reversing stimulus–response mappings

Open access
Schroder, Hans S., Moran, Tim P., Moser, Jason S., Altmann, Erik M.·2012·Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience

Abstract

How does switching tasks affect our ability to monitor and adapt our behavior? Largely independent lines of research have examined how individuals monitor their actions and adjust to errors, on the one hand, and how they are able to switch between two or more tasks, on the other. Few studies, however, have explored how these two aspects of cognitive-behavioral flexibility interact. That is, how individuals monitor their actions when task rules are switched remains unknown. The present study sought to address this question by examining the action-monitoring consequences of response switching-a form of task switching that involves switching the response that is associated with a particular stimulus. We recorded event-related brain potentials (ERPs) while participants performed a modified letter flanker task in which the stimulus-response (S-R) mappings were reversed between blocks. Specifically, we examined three ERPs-the N2, the error-related negativity (ERN), and the error positivity (Pe)-that have been closely associated with action monitoring. The findings revealed that S-R reversal blocks were associated with dynamic alterations of action-monitoring brain activity: the N2 and ERN were enhanced, whereas the Pe was reduced. Moreover, participants were less likely to adapt their posterror behavior in S-R reversal blocks. Taken together, these data suggest that response switching results in early enhancements of effortful control mechanisms (N2 and ERN) at the expense of reductions in later response evaluation processes (Pe). Thus, when rules change, our attempts at control are accompanied by less attention to our actions.

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 · 10.3758/s13415-012-0105-y

Cites

94 of 94 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?

  • In a non-anxious sample, the ERN is enhanced during switch blocks in comparison to non-switch blocks.

    “In a non-anxious sample, one study found that the ERN is enhanced during switch blocks in comparison to non-switch blocks, speculated to be reflective of enhanced response conflict (Schroder et al., 2012).”

    From The Error-Related Negativity (ERN) in Anxiety and Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD): A Call for Further Investigation of Task Parameters in the Flanker Task (2021) · cites this paper as Schroder et al., 2012

    The ERN results report a significantly larger ERN in switch than nonswitch blocks, and the Discussion interprets the finding in terms of conflict-related processing. The Participants section describes 67 undergraduates but does not establish that they were non-anxious, so that qualification is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 1

  1. Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes (G. V. Anrep, Trans.). Lon- don, U.K.: Oxford University Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schroder, H. S., Moran, T. P., Moser, J. S., & Altmann, E. M.
Affiliations
Michigan State University (US)
Corresponding author
Moser, Jason S.
Venue
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
Published
2012-07-14
Volume
12
Issue
4
Pages
629-643
ISSN
  • 1530-7026 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-135X
OpenAlex
W2119380745
Cited by
38
References
94
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
9.21
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 › Motor Control and Adaptation
Keywords
action monitoring, response switching, task switching, cognitive flexibility, error-related negativity, error positivity, N2 component, effortful control, treatment response assessment
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Physiological, Analysis of Variance, Attention, Brain Mapping, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Female, Humans, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Photic Stimulation, Psychophysiology, Reaction Time, Students, Time Factors, Universities

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