Limits...
How a co-actor's task affects monitoring of own errors: evidence from a social event-related potential study.

de Bruijn ER, Miedl SF, Bekkering H - Exp Brain Res (2011)

Bottom Line: Responses were compatible or incompatible relative to the go/no-go action of the co-actor.The results demonstrated increased Ne/ERN amplitudes and longer reaction times following errors on compatible compared to incompatible no-go stimuli.Importantly, we propose that inclusion of a co-actor's task in performance monitoring may facilitate adaptive behavior in social interactions enabling fast anticipatory and corrective actions.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition, and Behaviour, Radboud University Nijmegen, P.O. Box 9104, 6500 HE Nijmegen, The Netherlands. e.debruijn@donders.ru.nl

ABSTRACT
Efficient flexible behavior requires continuous monitoring of performance for possible deviations from the intended goal of an action. This also holds for joint action. When jointly performing a task, one needs to not only know the other's goals and intentions but also generate behavioral adjustments that are dependent on the other person's task. Previous studies have shown that in joint action people not only represent their own task but also the task of their co-actor. The current study investigated whether these so-called shared representations affect error monitoring as reflected in the response-locked error-related negativity (Ne/ERN) following own errors. Sixteen pairs of participants performed a social go/no-go task, while EEG and behavioral data were obtained. Responses were compatible or incompatible relative to the go/no-go action of the co-actor. Erroneous responses on no-go stimuli were examined. The results demonstrated increased Ne/ERN amplitudes and longer reaction times following errors on compatible compared to incompatible no-go stimuli. Thus, Ne/ERNs were larger after errors on trials that did not require a response from the co-actor either compared to errors on trials that did require a response from the co-actor. As the task of the other person is the only difference between these two types of errors, these findings show that people also represent their co-actor's task during error monitoring in joint action. An extension of existing models on performance monitoring in individual action is put forward to explain the current findings in joint action. Importantly, we propose that inclusion of a co-actor's task in performance monitoring may facilitate adaptive behavior in social interactions enabling fast anticipatory and corrective actions.

Show MeSH
Left panel frequency distribution of the four different conditions in the social go/no-go task. Right panel experimental setup with EEG participant sitting on the left side
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3102207&req=5

Fig2: Left panel frequency distribution of the four different conditions in the social go/no-go task. Right panel experimental setup with EEG participant sitting on the left side

Mentions: In the current study, we use a social go/no-go task (De Bruijn et al. 2008, 2011) to investigate whether the formation of shared representations affects error monitoring and behavioral adjustments following errors. Or in other words, do people also incorporate other’s task representations into the comparison process enabling error detection (see Fig. 1b, lower panel)? In the social go/no-go task, pairs of participants will have to respond to frequent target stimuli (go) and withhold this response to infrequent distractor stimuli (no-go). It is expected that the frequency distribution and speed instructions will especially result in erroneous responses on no-go stimuli, and therefore these trials will be the main focus of the analyses. All stimuli can either be compatible or incompatible with respect to the task (go or no-go) of the other person (see Fig. 2, left). Importantly, this means that the only difference in a participant on compatible and incompatible no-go stimuli is the task of the other participant (i.e., responding or withholding). More specifically, on compatible no-go trials, both participants have to withhold their response, while on incompatible no-go trials one has to withhold while the other has to respond. Differences in processing of these two types of no-go stimuli will be reflected in the effects of compatibility and will thus only be present when people also represent the task of their co-actor. Through comparison of the brain activity associated with own errors on compatible and incompatible no-go stimuli, we will be able to investigate whether shared representations have an effect on error monitoring as reflected in the amplitude of the Ne/ERN. If participants also incorporate the representation of the goal response of their competitor in the comparison process, a larger mismatch and thus increased Ne/ERN amplitude is expected on erroneous responses to compatible distractor stimuli compared to incompatible distractor stimuli. However, no differences in Ne/ERN amplitude between erroneous responses to compatible and incompatible stimuli are expected when people do not incorporate a representation of the task of the other.Fig. 2


How a co-actor's task affects monitoring of own errors: evidence from a social event-related potential study.

de Bruijn ER, Miedl SF, Bekkering H - Exp Brain Res (2011)

Left panel frequency distribution of the four different conditions in the social go/no-go task. Right panel experimental setup with EEG participant sitting on the left side
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3102207&req=5

Fig2: Left panel frequency distribution of the four different conditions in the social go/no-go task. Right panel experimental setup with EEG participant sitting on the left side
Mentions: In the current study, we use a social go/no-go task (De Bruijn et al. 2008, 2011) to investigate whether the formation of shared representations affects error monitoring and behavioral adjustments following errors. Or in other words, do people also incorporate other’s task representations into the comparison process enabling error detection (see Fig. 1b, lower panel)? In the social go/no-go task, pairs of participants will have to respond to frequent target stimuli (go) and withhold this response to infrequent distractor stimuli (no-go). It is expected that the frequency distribution and speed instructions will especially result in erroneous responses on no-go stimuli, and therefore these trials will be the main focus of the analyses. All stimuli can either be compatible or incompatible with respect to the task (go or no-go) of the other person (see Fig. 2, left). Importantly, this means that the only difference in a participant on compatible and incompatible no-go stimuli is the task of the other participant (i.e., responding or withholding). More specifically, on compatible no-go trials, both participants have to withhold their response, while on incompatible no-go trials one has to withhold while the other has to respond. Differences in processing of these two types of no-go stimuli will be reflected in the effects of compatibility and will thus only be present when people also represent the task of their co-actor. Through comparison of the brain activity associated with own errors on compatible and incompatible no-go stimuli, we will be able to investigate whether shared representations have an effect on error monitoring as reflected in the amplitude of the Ne/ERN. If participants also incorporate the representation of the goal response of their competitor in the comparison process, a larger mismatch and thus increased Ne/ERN amplitude is expected on erroneous responses to compatible distractor stimuli compared to incompatible distractor stimuli. However, no differences in Ne/ERN amplitude between erroneous responses to compatible and incompatible stimuli are expected when people do not incorporate a representation of the task of the other.Fig. 2

Bottom Line: Responses were compatible or incompatible relative to the go/no-go action of the co-actor.The results demonstrated increased Ne/ERN amplitudes and longer reaction times following errors on compatible compared to incompatible no-go stimuli.Importantly, we propose that inclusion of a co-actor's task in performance monitoring may facilitate adaptive behavior in social interactions enabling fast anticipatory and corrective actions.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition, and Behaviour, Radboud University Nijmegen, P.O. Box 9104, 6500 HE Nijmegen, The Netherlands. e.debruijn@donders.ru.nl

ABSTRACT
Efficient flexible behavior requires continuous monitoring of performance for possible deviations from the intended goal of an action. This also holds for joint action. When jointly performing a task, one needs to not only know the other's goals and intentions but also generate behavioral adjustments that are dependent on the other person's task. Previous studies have shown that in joint action people not only represent their own task but also the task of their co-actor. The current study investigated whether these so-called shared representations affect error monitoring as reflected in the response-locked error-related negativity (Ne/ERN) following own errors. Sixteen pairs of participants performed a social go/no-go task, while EEG and behavioral data were obtained. Responses were compatible or incompatible relative to the go/no-go action of the co-actor. Erroneous responses on no-go stimuli were examined. The results demonstrated increased Ne/ERN amplitudes and longer reaction times following errors on compatible compared to incompatible no-go stimuli. Thus, Ne/ERNs were larger after errors on trials that did not require a response from the co-actor either compared to errors on trials that did require a response from the co-actor. As the task of the other person is the only difference between these two types of errors, these findings show that people also represent their co-actor's task during error monitoring in joint action. An extension of existing models on performance monitoring in individual action is put forward to explain the current findings in joint action. Importantly, we propose that inclusion of a co-actor's task in performance monitoring may facilitate adaptive behavior in social interactions enabling fast anticipatory and corrective actions.

Show MeSH