Give it a second try? The influence of feedback and performance in the decision of reattempting.

Feedback evaluation can affect behavioural continuation or discontinuation, and is essential for cognitive and motor skill learning. One critical factor that influences feedback evaluation is participants' internal estimation of self-performance. Previous research has shown that two event-related potential components, the Feedback-Related Negativity (FRN) and the P3, are related to feedback evaluation. In the present study, we used a time estimation task and EEG recordings to test the influence of feedback and performance on participants' decisions, and the sensitivity of the FRN and P3 components to those factors. In the experiment, participants were asked to reproduce the total duration of an intermittently presented visual stimulus. Feedback was given after every response, and participants had then to decide whether to retry the same trial and try to earn reward points, or to move on to the next trial. Results showed that both performance and feedback influenced participants' decision on whether to retry the ongoing trial. In line with previous studies, the FRN showed larger amplitude in response to negative than to positive feedback. Moreover, our results were also in agreement with previous works showing the relationship between the amplitude of the FRN and the size of feedback-related prediction error (PE), and provide further insight in how PE size influences participants' decisions on whether or not to retry a task. Specifically, we found that the larger the FRN, the more likely participants were to base their decision on their performance - choosing to retry the current trial after good performance or to move on to the next trial after poor performance, regardless of the feedback received. Conversely, the smaller the FRN, the more likely participants were to base their decision on the feedback received.

Prediction-error-dependent processing of immediate and delayed positive feedback.

Learning often involves trial-and-error, i.e. repeating behaviours that lead to desired outcomes, and adjusting behaviour when outcomes do not meet our expectations and thus lead to prediction errors (PEs). PEs have been shown to be reflected in the reward positivity (RewP), an event-related potential (ERP) component between 200 and 350 ms after performance feedback which is linked to striatal processing and assessed via electroencephalography (EEG). Here we show that this is also true for delayed feedback processing, for which a critical role of the hippocampus has been suggested. We found a general reduction of the RewP for delayed feedback, but the PE was similarly reflected in the RewP and the later P300 for immediate and delayed positive feedback, while no effect was found for negative feedback. Our results suggest that, despite processing differences between immediate and delayed feedback, positive PEs drive feedback processing and learning irrespective of delay.

Whether and how to regulate: Emotion regulation in negative-feedback situations.

Emotion-regulation goals are often studied in isolation, despite them typically occurring in the presence of alternative goals. Negative feedback situations offer an intriguing context to study the interplay of emotion-regulation goals (wanting to feel better) and performance goals (wanting to perform better). Across five preregistered online studies (N = 1,087), we investigated emotion-regulation choice (i.e., whether and how to regulate) in feedback situations. Challenging the assumption that the goal to perform better is the focal goal in negative-feedback situations, we show that negative feedback increases the salience of the goal to feel better via negative affect in Studies 1-2. Moving beyond the question of whether people regulate their emotions when they receive negative feedback, we examined how they regulate their emotions in Studies 3-5. Focusing on the relative importance of the goals to feel and to perform better, we found that the goal to perform better but not the goal to feel better influences negative-feedback recipients' emotion-regulation strategy choice. A salient goal to perform better was associated with a preference for reappraisal over distraction. These results have critical implications for the emotion-regulation literature and models of feedback processing from an emotion-regulation perspective. They demonstrate that affect-oriented processes such as emotion regulation operate when people receive negative feedback. They also highlight the importance of studying alternative goals given their relevance for how people regulate their emotions. From a practical standpoint, the findings may help us to better understand why people sometimes fail to perform better following negative feedback. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Effort expenditure modulates feedback evaluations involving self-other agreement: evidence from brain potentials and neural oscillations.

The influence of effort expenditure on the subjective value in feedback involving material reward has been the focus of previous research. However, little is known about the impact of effort expenditure on subjective value evaluations when feedback involves reward that is produced in the context of social interaction (e.g. self-other agreement). Moreover, how effort expenditure influences confidence (second-order subjective value) in feedback evaluations remains unclear. Using electroencephalography, this study aimed to address these questions. Event-related potentials showed that, after exerting high effort, participants exhibited increased reward positivity difference in response to self-other (dis)agreement feedback. After exerting low effort, participants reported high confidence, and the self-other disagreement feedback evoked a larger P3a. Time-frequency analysis showed that the high-effort task evoked increased frontal midline theta power. In the low (vs. high)-effort task, the frontal midline delta power for self-other disagreement feedback was enhanced. These findings suggest that, at the early feedback evaluation stage, after exerting high effort, individuals exhibit an increased sensitivity of subjective value evaluation in response to self-other agreement feedback. At the later feedback evaluation stage, after completing the low-effort task, the self-other disagreement feedback violates the individuals'high confidence and leads to a metacognitive mismatch.

Emotional cues reduce Pavlovian interference in feedback-based go and nogo learning.

It is easier to execute a response in the promise of a reward and withhold a response in the promise of a punishment than vice versa, due to a conflict between cue-related Pavlovian and outcome-related instrumental action tendencies in the reverse conditions. This robust learning asymmetry in go and nogo learning is referred to as the Pavlovian bias. Interestingly, it is similar to motivational tendencies reported for affective facial expressions, i.e., facilitation of approach to a smile and withdrawal from a frown. The present study investigated whether and how learning from emotional faces instead of abstract stimuli modulates the Pavlovian bias in reinforcement learning. To this end, 137 healthy adult participants performed an orthogonalized Go/Nogo task that fully decoupled action (go/nogo) and outcome valence (win points/avoid losing points). Three groups of participants were tested with either emotional facial cues whose affective valence was either congruent (CON) or incongruent (INC) to the required instrumental response, or with neutral facial cues (NEU). Relative to NEU, the Pavlovian bias was reduced in both CON and INC, though still present under all learning conditions. Importantly, only for CON, the reduction of the Pavlovian bias effect was adaptive by improving learning performance in one of the conflict conditions. In contrast, the reduction of the Pavlovian bias in INC was completely driven by decreased learning performance in non-conflict conditions. These results suggest a potential role of arousal/salience in Pavlovian-instrumental regulation and cue-action congruency in the adaptability of goal-directed behavior. Implications for clinical application are discussed.

How does error correction occur during lexical learning?

We examined two theories of the mechanisms that enable error correction via corrective feedback. One theory focuses on enhancing the encoding of corrective feedback (corrective feedback-encoding facilitation account). The other is the recursive reminding theory, which considers memory integration between an initial event with error generation and a subsequent event involving correct answer feedback. The Japanese idiom pronunciation task was used in two experiments, in which it was manipulated whether the generated errors were visually presented, as well as corrective feedback. In an immediate retest after a five-minute retention interval, participants recalled their errors in the initial test and their correct answers. In addition, error trials fell into three ordinal confidence categories (low, medium, and high). First, a typical hypercorrection was replicated in which higher-confidence errors are more likely to be corrected. However, this was not observed when errors from the initial test were not recalled in the final test, which does not align with the corrective feedback-encoding facilitation account. The second issue was whether additional experience with the generated errors would enhance the error correction. Given the recursive reminding theory, the additional experience of errors should reinforce the mutual dependence between an error and the correct answer provided by feedback, improving cued recall performance later. This prediction is supported. The present findings suggest that the recursive reminding theory can explain the benefits of generating errors when learning through corrective feedback and can also be expanded to understand the hypercorrection effect.

Exploration of the influence of the quantification method and reference scheme on feedback-related negativity and standardized measurement error of feedback-related negativity amplitudes in a trust game.

Various approaches have been taken over the years to quantify event-related potential (ERP) responses and these approaches may vary in their utility connecting empirical research and scientific claims. In this work we compared different quantification methods as well as the influence of three reference methods (linked mastoids, average reference, and current source density) on the resulting ERP amplitude. We use the experimental effects and effect sizes (Cohen's d) to evaluate the different methodological variants and we calculate intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). In addition, the bootstrapped standard error of the means (SME, Luck et al., 2021), which was recently suggested as a quality criterion for ERP research, is used for this purpose. Our example for an ERP is the feedback-related negativity (FRN) to feedback about trustee behavior in a trust game with participants in the trustor position. We found that the quantification methods concerning the FRN influenced the absolute value of condition effects in the experimental paradigm. Yet, the patterns of effects were detected by all chosen methods, except for the 'individual difference wave'-based peak window approach. In addition, our findings stress the importance of checking the reference electrodes concerning effects of the experimental conditions. Furthermore, interactions of topographical distribution and reference choice should be considered. Finally, we were able to show that the SME is lower for more datapoints that are given in the quantification period of the FRN, and higher for more negative FRN amplitudes. These biases may lead to divergence of SME and effect size detection. Therefore, if the SME was used to compare different processing choices one should consider controlling for these important aspects of the data and possibly include other quality criteria like effect sizes.

Beneficial effects of communicating intentions when delivering moral criticism: Cognitive and neural responses.

People often do not accept criticism on their morality, especially when delivered by outgroup members. In two preregistered studies, we investigated whether people become more receptive to such negative feedback when feedback senders communicate their intention to help. Participants received negative feedback from ostensible others on their selfish (rather than altruistic) decisions in a donation task. We manipulated the identity of a feedback sender (ingroup vs. outgroup) and the intention that they provided for giving feedback. A sender either did not communicate any intentions, indicated the intention to help the feedback receiver improve, or communicated the intention to show moral superiority. We measured participants' self-reported responses to the feedback (Study 1, N = 44) and additionally recorded an EEG in Study 2 (N = 34). Results showed that when no intentions were communicated, participants assumed worse intentions from outgroup senders than ingroup senders (Study 1). However, group membership had no significant effect once feedback senders made their intentions explicit. Moreover, across studies, when feedback senders communicated their intention to help, participants perceived feedback as less unfair compared with when senders tried to convey their moral superiority. Complementing these results, exploratory event-related potential results of Study 2 suggested that communicating the intention to help reduced participants' attentional vigilance toward negative feedback messages on their morality (i.e., decreased P200 amplitudes). These results demonstrate the beneficial effects of communicating the intention to help when one tries to encourage others' moral growth through criticism.

Processing abnormalities in monetary outcome evaluations among male individuals with opioid use disorder: evidence from feedback-related negativity.

Background: Numerous studies have highlighted the pivotal role of alterations in the monetary reward system in the development and maintenance of substance use disorder (SUD). Although these alterations have been well documented in various forms of SUD, the electrophysiological mechanisms specific to opioid use disorder (OUD) remain underexplored. Understanding these mechanisms is critical for developing targeted interventions and advancing theories of addiction specific to opioid use.Objectives: To explore abnormalities in monetary reward outcome processing in males with OUD. We hypothesized that control individuals would show higher feedback-related negativity (FRN) to losses, unlike those in the OUD group, where FRN to losses and gains would not differ significantly.Methods: Fifty-seven participants (29 male individuals with OUD [heroin] and 28 male controls) were evaluated. A combination of the monetary incentive delay task (MIDT) and event-related potential (ERP) technology was used to investigate electrophysiological differences in monetary reward feedback processing between the OUD and healthy control groups.Results: We observed a significant interaction between group (control vs. OUD) and monetary outcome (loss vs. gain), indicated by p < .05 and η2p = 0.116. Specifically, control participants showed stronger negative FRN to losses than gains (p < .05), unlike the OUD group (p > .05).Conclusion: This study's FRN data indicate that males with OUD show altered processing of monetary rewards, marked by reduced sensitivity to loss. These findings offer electrophysiological insights into why males with OUD may pursue drugs despite potential economic downsides.

Ghrelin decreases sensitivity to negative feedback and increases prediction-error related caudate activity in humans, a randomized controlled trial.

The stomach-derived hormone ghrelin plays not only a role in feeding, starvation, and survival, but it has been suggested to also be involved in the stress response, in neuropsychiatric conditions, and in alcohol and drug use disorders. Mechanisms related to reward processing might mediate ghrelin's broader effects on complex behaviors, as indicated by animal studies and mostly correlative human studies. Here, using a within-subject double-blind placebo-controlled design with intravenous ghrelin infusion in healthy volunteers (n = 30), we tested whether ghrelin alters sensitivity to reward and punishment in a reward learning task. Parameters were derived from a computational model of participants' task behavior. The reversal learning task with monetary rewards was performed during functional brain imaging to investigate ghrelin effects on brain signals related to reward prediction errors. Compared to placebo, ghrelin decreased punishment sensitivity (t = -2.448, p = 0.021), while reward sensitivity was unaltered (t = 0.8, p = 0.43). We furthermore found increased prediction-error related activity in the dorsal striatum during ghrelin administration (region of interest analysis: t-values ≥ 4.21, p-values ≤ 0.044). Our results support a role for ghrelin in reward processing that extends beyond food-related rewards. Reduced sensitivity to negative outcomes and increased processing of prediction errors may be beneficial for food foraging when hungry but could also relate to increased risk taking and impulsivity in the broader context of addictive behaviors.

The impact of social hierarchies on neural response to feedback evaluations after advice giving.

Advisors generally evaluate advisee-relevant feedback after advice giving. The response to these feedback-(1) whether the advice is accepted and (2) whether the advice is optimal-usually involves prestige. Prior literature has found that prestige is the basis by which individuals attain a superior status in the social hierarchy. However, whether advisors are motivated to attain a superior status when engaging in advice giving remains uncharacterized. Using event-related potentials, this study investigates how advisors evaluate feedback after giving advice to superior (vs. inferior) status advisees. A social hierarchy was first established based on two advisees (one was ranked as superior status and another as inferior status) as well as participants' performance in a dot-estimation task in which all participants were ranked as medium status. Participants then engaged in a game in which they were assigned roles as advisors to a superior or inferior status advisee. Afterward, the participants received feedback in two phases. In Phase 1, participants were told whether the advisees accepted the advice provided. In Phase 2, the participants were informed whether the advice they provided was correct. In these two phases, when the advisee was of superior status, participants exhibited stronger feedback-related negativity and P300 difference in response to (1) whether their advice was accepted, and (2) whether their advice was correct. Moreover, the P300 was notably larger when the participants' correct advice led to a gain for a superior-status advisee. In the context of advice giving, advisors are particularly motivated to attain a superior status when the feedback involving social hierarchies, which is reflected in higher sensitivity to feedback associated with superior status advisees at earlier and later stages during feedback evaluations in brains.

Unraveling the influence of trial-based motivational changes on performance monitoring stages in a flanker task.

Performance monitoring (PM) is a vital component of adaptive behavior and known to be influenced by motivation. We examined effects of potential gain (PG) and loss avoidance (LA) on neural correlates of PM at different processing stages, using a task with trial-based changes in these motivational contexts. Findings suggest more attention is allocated to the PG context, with higher amplitudes for respective correlates of stimulus and feedback processing. The PG context favored rapid responses, while the LA context emphasized accurate responses. Lower response thresholds in the PG context after correct responses derived from a drift-diffusion model also indicate a more approach-oriented response style in the PG context. This cognitive shift is mirrored in neural correlates: negative feedback in the PG context elicited a higher feedback-related negativity (FRN) and higher theta power, whereas positive feedback in the LA context elicited higher P3a and P3b amplitudes, as well as higher theta power. There was no effect of motivational context on response-locked brain activity. Given the similar frequency of negative feedback in both contexts, the elevated FRN and theta power in PG trials cannot be attributed to variations in reward prediction error. The observed variations in the FRN indicate that the effect of outcome valence is modulated by motivational salience.

Dopaminergic error signals retune to social feedback during courtship.

Hunger, thirst, loneliness and ambition determine the reward value of food, water, social interaction and performance outcome1. Dopamine neurons respond to rewards meeting these diverse needs2-8, but it remains unclear how behaviour and dopamine signals change as priorities change with new opportunities in the environment. One possibility is that dopamine signals for distinct drives are routed to distinct dopamine pathways9,10. Another possibility is that dopamine signals in a given pathway are dynamically tuned to rewards set by the current priority. Here we used electrophysiology and fibre photometry to test how dopamine signals associated with quenching thirst, singing a good song and courting a mate change as male zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata) were provided with opportunities to retrieve water, evaluate song performance or court a female. When alone, water reward signals were observed in two mesostriatal pathways but singing-related performance error signals were routed to Area X, a striatal nucleus specialized for singing. When courting a female, water seeking was reduced and dopamine responses to both water and song performance outcomes diminished. Instead, dopamine signals in Area X were driven by female calls timed with the courtship song. Thus the dopamine system handled coexisting drives by routing vocal performance and social feedback signals to a striatal area for communication and by flexibly re-tuning to rewards set by the prioritized drive.

Effects of feedback reliability on event-related potentials in an arrow flanker task.

The processing of feedback is essential for learning, error detection, and correction. However, the underlying mechanisms of the feedback's characteristics, such as its reliability, valence, and expectations in the processing of error information, are not completely clear. The two degrees of feedback reliability, reliable feedback and unreliable feedback, respectively, were established by manipulating the feedback valence. The time course of event-related potentials (ERP) during the arrow flanker tasks was used to investigate the effects of feedback reliability and responses on brain activity. Three ERP components, the error-related negativity (ERN), feedback-related negativity (FRN), and P3, respectively, were measured. The impacts of feedback reliability and responses on ERN, FRN, and P3 had a different profile. Specifically, ERN and P3 are associated with the responses but not the feedback reliability, while FRN is associated with feedback reliability and feedback expectations but not the responses. The ERN, FRN, and P3 reflect distinct cognitive processes in the processing of error information.

Neural correlates of evaluations of non-binary social feedback: An EEG study.

PURPOSE: In complex and diverse social circumstances, decision making is affected by social feedback. Although previous studies have examined the electrophysiological correlates of social feedback with a binary valence, those related to non-binary feedback, or the magnitude of social feedback, remain unclear. This study investigated the electrophysiological correlates of non-binary social feedback and subsequent action selection processing. METHODS: Participants were asked to complete a Gabor patch direction judgment task in which they were required to make judgments before and after receiving social feedback. They were informed that the feedback stimuli represented the degree to which other participants made the same choice. RESULTS & CONCLUSION: The results revealed that feedback that was highly concordant with the participant's judgments elicited greater P300 activity, which was associated with the fulfillment of expectations regarding social reward. Moreover, moderately concordant feedback induced stronger theta band power, which may indicate monitoring of subjective conflict. Temporal changes in theta power during feedback phase may also relate to adjustments in prediction error. Additionally, when an initial judgment was maintained following social feedback, we observed a stronger increase in beta power, indicating an association with post-social-feedback action processing.

The neural correlates of continuous feedback processing.

Feedback processing is commonly studied by analyzing the brain's response to discrete rather than continuous events. Such studies have led to the hypothesis that rapid phasic midbrain dopaminergic activity tracks reward prediction errors (RPEs), the effects of which are measurable at the scalp via electroencephalography (EEG). Although studies using continuous feedback are sparse, recent animal work suggests that moment-to-moment changes in reward are tracked by slowly ramping midbrain dopaminergic activity. Some have argued that these ramping signals index state values rather than RPEs. Our goal here was to develop an EEG measure of continuous feedback processing in humans, then test whether its behavior could be accounted for by the RPE hypothesis. Participants completed a stimulus-response learning task in which a continuous reward cue gradually increased or decreased over time. A regression-based unmixing approach revealed EEG activity with a topography and time course consistent with the stimulus-preceding negativity (SPN), a scalp potential previously linked to reward anticipation and tonic dopamine release. Importantly, this reward-related activity depended on outcome expectancy: as predicted by the RPE hypothesis, activity for expected reward cues was reduced compared to unexpected reward cues. These results demonstrate the possibility of using human scalp-recorded potentials to track continuous feedback processing, and test candidate hypotheses of this activity.

Distinct influence of inter- versus intra-trial feedback on the brain response to subsequent feedback: Evidence from event-related potentials.

Substantial evidence indicates that feedback processing not only varies with the valence of feedback, but is also highly dependent on contextual factors. Even so, the influence of prior outcome history on current outcome evaluation is far from clear. To investigate this issue, we conducted two event-related potential (ERP) experiments using a modified gambling task whereby each trial was associated with two consequences. In experiment 1, two instances of feedback indicated participant performance on two dimensions of a single decision, within a trial. In experiment 2, participants made two decisions in each trial, and then received two instances of feedback. We examined the feedback-related negativity (FRN) as an index of feedback processing. When both instances of feedback were relevant to the same trial (intra-trial), the FRN to the second was affected by the valence of the immediately previous feedback: The FRN was amplified to losses following wins. This was observed in both experiment 1 and experiment 2. When two instances of feedback were relevant to two different trials (inter-trial), the effect of immediately previous feedback on the FRN was inconsistent. In experiment 1 there was no effect of feedback from the previous trial on the FRN. However, in Experiment 2 there was an effect of inter-trial feedback on the FRN that was opposite to the effect of intra-trial feedback: The FRN was amplified when losses followed losses. Taken together, the findings suggest that the neural systems involved in reward processing dynamically and continuously integrate preceding feedback for the evaluation of present feedback.

Learning new words via feedback-Association between feedback-locked ERPs and recall performance-An exploratory study.

Feedback learning is thought to involve the dopamine system and its projection sites in the basal ganglia and anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), regions associated with procedural learning. Under certain conditions, such as when feedback is delayed, feedback-locked activation is pronounced in the medial temporal lobe (MTL), which is associated with declarative learning. In event-related potential research, the feedback-related negativity (FRN) has been linked to immediate feedback processing, while the N170, possibly reflecting MTL activity, has been related to delayed feedback processing. In the current study, we performed an exploratory investigation on the relation between N170 and FRN amplitude and memory performance in a test for declarative memory (free recall), also exploring the role of feedback delay. To this end, we adapted a paradigm in which participants learned associations between non-objects and non-words with either immediate or delayed feedback, and added a subsequent free recall test. We indeed found that N170, but not FRN amplitudes, depended on later free recall performance, with smaller amplitudes for later remembered non-words. In an additional analysis with memory performance as dependent variable, the N170, but not the FRN amplitude predicted free recall, modulated by feedback timing and valence. This finding shows that the N170 reflects an important process during feedback processing, possibly related to expectations and their violation, but is distinct from the process reflected by the FRN.

Getting off track: Cortical feedback processing network modulated by continuous error signal during target-feedback mismatch.

Performance monitoring and feedback processing - especially in the wake of erroneous outcomes - represent a crucial aspect of everyday life, allowing us to deal with imminent threats in the short term but also promoting necessary behavioral adjustments in the long term to avoid future conflicts. Over the last thirty years, research extensively analyzed the neural correlates of processing discrete error stimuli, unveiling the error-related negativity (ERN) and error positivity (Pe) as two main components of the cognitive response. However, the connection between the ERN/Pe and distinct stages of error processing, ranging from action monitoring to subsequent corrective behavior, remains ambiguous. Furthermore, mundane actions such as steering a vehicle already transgress the scope of discrete erroneous events and demand fine-tuned feedback control, and thus, the processing of continuous error signals - a topic scarcely researched at present. We analyzed two electroencephalography datasets to investigate the processing of continuous erroneous signals during a target tracking task, employing feedback in various levels and modalities. We observed significant differences between correct (slightly delayed) and erroneous feedback conditions in the larger one of the two datasets that we analyzed, both in sensor and source space. Furthermore, we found strong error-induced modulations that appeared consistent across datasets and error conditions, indicating a clear order of engagement of specific brain regions that correspond to individual components of error processing.

Expending effort may share neural responses with reward and evokes high subjective satisfaction.

Throughout our daily lives, the levels of effort we invest in various tasks are influenced by reward processing. The subjective expectation after expending effort is a primary factor affecting reward processing. However, recent studies indicate that individual differences in reward anticipation influence this subjective valuation. To better understand the relationship between effort expenditure and the subjective valuation of rewards, in this study, we perform an experiment in which we manipulate effort, control reward expectation implicitly, and measure the subjective valuation of rewards using event-related potentials (ERPs) and physical effort through behavioral measures (number of keystrokes). In the reward-task paradigm, 30 subjects performed effort and control trials, with the reward probability comparable across the effort and control conditions. We also examined the ERPs associated with the valuation of subjective rewards, including reward positivity (RewP) and set reward expectation controlled as the baseline. The results showed that the ERP amplitudes, the number of keystrokes, and explicit satisfaction ratings were all significantly greater in the effort condition than in the control condition. The participants maintained high levels of effort throughout the sessions associated with the experiment. The results of this study suggest that when reward expectations are controlled, effort expenditure evokes neural responses similar to reward feedback being given, which is linked with increased subjective satisfaction.