Cited by 49Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Performance monitoring in obsessive–compulsive disorder: A temporo-spatial principal component analysis

Open access
Klawohn, Julia, Riesel, Anja, Grützmann, Rosa, Kathmann, Norbert, Endrass, Tanja·2014·Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience

Abstract

Hyperactive performance monitoring is a robust finding in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Patients show increased amplitudes of the error-related negativity (ERN) and correct-related negativity (CRN). Recently, two temporo-spatial factors were shown to contribute to both ERPs in healthy individuals. In the present study, it was investigated whether the factor structure underlying ERN and CRN is similar in OCD and which factors differ between groups. A principal component analysis (PCA) was employed to investigate the temporo-spatial factor structure of ERN and CRN. Twenty-six OCD patients and 26 healthy controls conducted a flanker task. EEG data were analyzed as conventional ERP components and as factor scores derived from temporo-spatial PCA. ERP results showed expected increases in ERN and CRN amplitudes in OCD patients. For both groups, the PCA confirmed the assumed factor structure of a central and a fronto-parietal factor contributing to ERN and CRN. Factor scores of both factors were differently affected by response correctness in OCD. Alterations in factor scores indicate increased activity in both an outcome-independent monitoring process and an error-sensitive process, contributing to overactive performance monitoring in OCD.

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/s13415-014-0248-0

Cites

73 of 73 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?

  • Two studies that did not give participants feedback about their responses observed a significant or marginally significant decrease in the amplitude of OCD patients' Pe component.

    “Indeed, two studies that did not give participants feedback about their responses observed a significant or marginally significant decrease in the amplitude of OCD patients’ Pe component [31, 32].”

    From Error-Related Brain Potentials as Biomarkers of Pathology Severity and Treatment Resistance in Patients With Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (2026) · cites this paper as [32]

    The ERP results report significantly reduced error-related positivity in OCD patients at the frontal electrode FCz (p = .018), and the task procedure describes no response feedback. But the Discussion distinguishes this frontal or early Pe finding from the conventional parietal Pe, which did not differ between groups. This paper therefore supports the claim only if “Pe component” means the frontal Pe; it does not support an unqualified decrease in Pe amplitude. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Patients included in previous studies that showed a significant increase in ERN/CRN amplitude of OCD patients compared with controls had significantly less severe forms of the disorder, with mean Y-BOCS scores ranging from 17 to 22.5.

    “In comparison, patients included in previous studies that showed a significant increase in the ERN/CRN amplitude of OCD patients compared with controls [8, 9, 26, 28–30, 32] had significantly less severe forms of the disorder, with mean Y‐BOCS scores ranging from 17 to 22.5.”

    From Error-Related Brain Potentials as Biomarkers of Pathology Severity and Treatment Resistance in Patients With Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (2026) · cites this paper as [32]

    Table 1 (page unavailable) reports a mean Y-BOCS score of 22.3 for this study’s OCD patients, within the claimed range. The ERP results report significantly greater ERN amplitudes than in controls, but CRN group differences reached only trend level. The paper does not establish that its patients had significantly less severe OCD than those in the citing study. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Such a large difference between the Pe/Pc of OCD patients and controls has not yet been reported in the literature, although two studies have already shown a decrease in Pe amplitude in patients compared with controls.

    “Such a large difference between the Pe/Pc of OCD patients and controls has not yet been reported in the literature, although two studies have already shown a decrease in Pe amplitude in patients compared with controls [23, 32].”

    From Error-Related Brain Potentials as Biomarkers of Pathology Severity and Treatment Resistance in Patients With Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (2026) · cites this paper as [32]

    The Discussion reports a reduced frontal, early Pe in OCD patients compared with healthy controls, supporting this paper as one study behind the cited decrease. It also says the conventional Pe did not differ between groups, so the unqualified claim about Pe amplitude is broader than this paper’s finding. The statement about how unusually large the citing study’s Pe/Pc difference is appears to be the citing authors’ own comparison. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Treatment with a serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SRI) has no effect on the ERN.

    “Because studies have indicated that treatment with a serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SRI) has no effect on the ERN, 43 patients were enrolled taking a stable dose of an SRI but no other medications [15, 17–19, 27].”

    From Altered Error Monitoring and Decreased Flanker Task Accuracy in Pediatric Obsessive–Compulsive Disorder (2026) · cites this paper as [27]

    The ERP results (page unavailable) found no statistically significant medication effect on ERN/CRN peak amplitudes in patients with OCD. But they reported a trend toward attenuated amplitudes in patients taking SSRIs, and the PCA results found a significant medication effect on a factor contributing to the ERN. The paper therefore does not establish the unqualified claim that SRI treatment has no effect on the ERN. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Of the eight studies examining the Pe in adults with OCD, the others found no differences between OCD cases and healthy controls.

    “Of the eight studies examining the Pe in adults with OCD, one found a diminished Pe with the others finding no differences between OCD cases and HC [8, 27].”

    From Altered Error Monitoring and Decreased Flanker Task Accuracy in Pediatric Obsessive–Compulsive Disorder (2026) · cites this paper as [27]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) says the Pe did not differ between OCD and control groups, consistent with four earlier studies, supporting the no-difference finding for those studies. It does not establish that eight adult studies were examined or that all the other studies found no difference; it also reports reduced frontal positivity in the present OCD group. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    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. American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) (Vol. 4th ed. Text Revision). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Klawohn, J., Riesel, A., Grützmann, R., Kathmann, N., & Endrass, T.
Affiliations
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (DE)
Corresponding author
Klawohn, Julia
Venue
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
Published
2014-01-28
Volume
14
Issue
3
Pages
983-995
ISSN
  • 1530-7026 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-135X
OpenAlex
W1972653561
Cited by
49
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 3
FWCI
5.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (EN 906/1–1)
  • Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
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
obsessive-compulsive disorder, performance monitoring, error-related negativity, event-related potentials, flanker task, error sensitivity
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain Mapping, Contingent Negative Variation, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Visual, Female, Humans, Functional Laterality, Male, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Photic Stimulation, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychomotor Performance, Reaction Time, Principal Component Analysis, 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