Cited by 39Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeural dynamics and brain functionFree Will and Agency

Contrasting time and frequency domains: ERN and induced theta oscillations differentially predict post-error behavior

Open access
Beatty, Paul J., Buzzell, George A., Roberts, Daniel M., McDonald, Craig G.·2020·Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience

Abstract

The present study investigated the neural dynamics of error processing in both the time and frequency domains, as well as associated behavioral phenomena, at the single-trial level. We used a technique that enabled us to separately investigate the evoked and induced aspects of the EEG signal (Cohen & Donner, 2013, Journal of Neurophysiology, 110[12], 2752-2763). We found that at the single-trial level, while the (evoked) error-related negativity (ERN) predicted only post-error slowing (PES)-and only when errors occurred on incongruent trials-induced frontal midline theta power served as a robust predictor of both PES and post-error accuracy (PEA) regardless of stimulus congruency. Mediation models of both electrophysiological indices demonstrated that although the relationship between theta and PEA was mediated by PES, there was not a relationship between the ERN and PEA. Our data suggest that although the ERN and frontal midline theta index functionally related underlying cognitive processes, they are not simply the same process manifested in different domains. In addition, our findings are consistent with the adaptive theory of post-error slowing, as PES was positively associated with post-error accuracy at the single-trial level. More generally, our study provides additional support for the inclusion of a time-frequency approach to better understand the role of medial frontal cortex in action monitoring.

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/s13415-020-00792-7

Cites

62 of 62 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?

  • Mid-frontal oscillatory activity in the theta band (4-8 Hz) is thought to be a mechanism by which populations of neurons compute and coordinate top-down control across broad brain networks.

    “Mid-frontal oscillatory activity in the theta band (4 -8 Hz) is thought to be a mechanism by which populations of neurons compute and coordinate top-down control across broad brain networks (Beatty et al., 2020; Buzzell et al., 2019, 2020; Cavanagh & Frank, 2014; Shner-Livne et al., 2024; Valadez & Simons, 2018).”

    From Foster care intervention protects cognitive control skills in young adults exposed to institutional rearing (2026) · cites this paper as Beatty et al., 2020

    The paper’s Abstract (page unavailable) describes frontal midline theta at 4–7 Hz as a monitoring signal thought to recruit cognitive control, and its Discussion links induced theta to adaptive post-error behavior. It does not describe neuronal populations computing or coordinating top-down control across broad brain networks; it also specifies 4–7 Hz rather than 4–8 Hz. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The ERN reflects mid-frontal theta activity that is phase-locked across trials, whereas the theta power measure employed here represents the total of both phase-locked and non-phase-locked theta activity.

    “whereas the ERN reflects mid-frontal theta activity that is phase-locked across trials, the theta power measure employed here represents the total of both phase-locked and non-phase-locked theta activity (Beatty et al., 2020; Cavanagh & Frank, 2014; Shner-Livne et al., 2024).”

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

2 of the 64 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2014). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. ArXiv:1406.5823 [Stat]. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1406.5823 · arXiv
  2. Falkenstein, M., Hohnsbein, J., Hoormann, J., & Blanke, L. (1991). Effects of crossmodal divided attention on late ERP components: I I . E r r o r p r o c e s s i . Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 78(6), 447-455.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Beatty, P. J., Buzzell, G. A., Roberts, D. M., & McDonald, C. G.
Affiliations
  • George Mason University (US)
  • University of Maryland, College Park (US)
Corresponding author
Beatty, Paul J.
Venue
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
Published
2020-04-17
Volume
20
Issue
3
Pages
636-647
ISSN
  • 1530-7026 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-135X
OpenAlex
W3016781140
Cited by
39
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7
FWCI
2.83
Type
journal article
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 › Neural dynamics and brain function
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Free Will and Agency
Keywords
error-related negativity, theta oscillations, post-error slowing, error processing, time-frequency analysis, single-trial EEG, action monitoring, medial frontal cortex
MeSH terms
Adult, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Female, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Male, Psychomotor Performance, Theta Rhythm, Time Factors, Young Adult, Executive Function

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