↓ Skip to main content

Mistakes that affect others: An fMRI study on processing of own errors in a social context

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, April 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
149 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Mistakes that affect others: An fMRI study on processing of own errors in a social context
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, April 2011
DOI 10.1007/s00221-011-2677-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sina Radke, F. P. de Lange, M. Ullsperger, E. R. A. de Bruijn

Abstract

In social contexts, errors have a special significance and often bear consequences for others. Thinking about others and drawing social inferences in interpersonal games engages the mentalizing system. We used neuroimaging to investigate the differences in brain activations between errors that affect only agents themselves and errors that additionally influence the payoffs of interaction partners. Activation in posterior medial frontal cortex (pMFC) and bilateral insula was increased for all errors, whereas errors that implied consequences for others specifically activated medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), an important part of the mentalizing system. The results demonstrate that performance monitoring in social contexts involves additional processes and brain structures compared with individual performance monitoring where errors only have consequences for the person committing them. Taking into account how one's behavior may affect others is particularly crucial for adapting behavior in interpersonal interactions and joint action.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 149 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 4 3%
Canada 4 3%
Switzerland 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 135 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 32 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 20%
Student > Master 21 14%
Professor 10 7%
Student > Bachelor 9 6%
Other 34 23%
Unknown 13 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 68 46%
Neuroscience 17 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 5%
Social Sciences 7 5%
Other 17 11%
Unknown 20 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 May 2012.
All research outputs
#2,422,894
of 22,664,267 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#172
of 3,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,020
of 109,694 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#1
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,664,267 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,217 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 109,694 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.