Loss feedback negativity elicited by single- versus conjoined-feature stimuli

Event-related brain potential studies show that negative feedback in guessing tasks elicits a medial frontal negativity. Most theory and experimentation concerning this feedback-related negativity (FRN) has assumed that the FRN has little relationship to the perceptual characteristics of the feedback. This study challenges this assumption. We used a single visual feature or a conjunction of features to indicate reward feedback in a gambling task. In the single-feature condition, losses elicited a larger FRN than gains; in the conjoined-feature condition, that difference was not observed. The results are consistent with the proposal that the FRN is modulated by the deviation of feedback stimuli from a perceptual template. Future studies must not confound the perceptual properties and the valence of reward feedback.

[1]  David E. Kieras,et al.  A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 2. Accounts of psychological refractory-period phenomena. , 1997 .

[2]  Clay B. Holroyd,et al.  The neural basis of human error processing: reinforcement learning, dopamine, and the error-related negativity. , 2002, Psychological review.

[3]  Sander Nieuwenhuis,et al.  Mediofrontal negativities in the absence of responding. , 2005, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[4]  Clay B. Holroyd,et al.  Dorsal anterior cingulate cortex integrates reinforcement history to guide voluntary behavior , 2008, Cortex.

[5]  A. Sanfey,et al.  Independent Coding of Reward Magnitude and Valence in the Human Brain , 2004, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[6]  Clay B. Holroyd,et al.  The feedback-related negativity reflects the binary evaluation of good versus bad outcomes , 2006, Biological Psychology.

[7]  E. Donchin,et al.  Probability effects on stimulus evaluation and response processes. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  Clay B. Holroyd,et al.  ERP correlates of feedback and reward processing in the presence and absence of response choice. , 2005, Cerebral cortex.

[9]  D. Meyer,et al.  A Neural System for Error Detection and Compensation , 1993 .

[10]  Clay B. Holroyd,et al.  Sensitivity of electrophysiological activity from medial frontal cortex to utilitarian and performance feedback. , 2004, Cerebral cortex.

[11]  M. Falkenstein,et al.  Late visual and auditory ERP components and choice reaction time , 1993, Biological Psychology.

[12]  Clay B. Holroyd,et al.  Errors in reward prediction are re£ected in the event-related brain potential , 2003 .

[13]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Rules of the Mind , 1993 .

[14]  Clay B. Holroyd,et al.  Brain potentials associated with expected and unexpected good and bad outcomes. , 2005, Psychophysiology.

[15]  P. Read Montague,et al.  When Things Are Better or Worse than Expected: The Medial Frontal Cortex and the Allocation of Processing Resources , 2006, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[16]  E Donchin,et al.  A new method for off-line removal of ocular artifact. , 1983, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[17]  Jonathan R. Folstein,et al.  Novelty and conflict in the categorization of complex stimuli. , 2008, Psychophysiology.

[18]  Jonathan R. Folstein,et al.  Influence of cognitive control and mismatch on the N2 component of the ERP: a review. , 2007, Psychophysiology.

[19]  C. Braun,et al.  Event-Related Brain Potentials Following Incorrect Feedback in a Time-Estimation Task: Evidence for a Generic Neural System for Error Detection , 1997, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[20]  Adrian R. Willoughby,et al.  The Medial Frontal Cortex and the Rapid Processing of Monetary Gains and Losses , 2002, Science.

[21]  D E Kieras,et al.  A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanisms. , 1997, Psychological review.

[22]  A. Treisman,et al.  A feature-integration theory of attention , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.