Unexpected events can have internal causes (action errors) as well as external causes (perceptual novelty). Both events call for adaptations of ongoing behavior, resulting, amongst other things, in post-error and post-novelty slowing (PES/PNS) of reaction times (RT). Both types of events are processed in prefrontal brain areas, indexed by event-related potentials (ERPs): Errors are followed by a complex of ERPs comprised of the error-related negativity (ERN) and error positivity (Pe), whereas novels are followed by a N2/P3 complex. However, despite those overlapping properties, past neuroscientific studies of both types of events resulted in largely separate branches of research. Only recently have theoretical efforts proposed overlapping neuronal networks for the computation of 'unexpectedness' in general. Crucially, in a recent study, we have shown that both errors and novelty are indeed processed in the same neuronal network in the human brain: the prefrontal-cingulate performance-monitoring network (PCMN) underlying the ERN also explained significant parts of the N2/P3 complex. Here, we attempt to take this research further by investigating the causal role of the PCMN in both error and novelty processing. Eight patients with ischemic lesions to the PCMN and eight control participants performed a version of the flanker task in which they made errors, while also being presented with unexpected action effects on a subset of otherwise correct trials. In line with our predictions, lesions to the PCMN lead to significant reductions in ERP amplitude following both errors and perceptual novelty. Also, while the age-matched control participants showed the expected pattern of adaptive RT slowing to both errors and novelty, patients did not exhibit adaptive slowing behaviors following either event. These results support recent theoretical accounts according to which a general PCMN reacts to surprising events, regardless of valence and/or source of the unexpectedness.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 02 October 2013.
All research outputs
#22,310,939
of 34,358,242 outputs
Outputs from Cortex: A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System & Behavior
#2,093
of 3,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,863
of 248,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cortex: A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System & Behavior
#23
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,358,242 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,468 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 248,566 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
