↓ Skip to main content

Learning context modulates the processing of expectancy violations

Overview of attention for article published in Brain Research, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Learning context modulates the processing of expectancy violations
Published in
Brain Research, October 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.brainres.2015.10.017
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The detection of unexpected or unfavorable events is crucial for successful behavioral adaptation. There is a family of ERP components, the so-called error negativities, that has been associated with these detection processes. In the current study, we explored the functional characteristics of one of these components, the N2b which reflects the detection of unexpected events in a stream of stimuli in our environment, in more detail. In a sequence learning task, we found that the same type of deviant event elicited an N2b only when it conveyed information about the to-be-learned sequence, but not when it was rendered learning-irrelevant by means of task instruction. This supports the view that deviant events generate an error negativity in a similar way as committed errors and negative feedback. It also demonstrates that error monitoring processes are very flexible and can be tailored to the specific demands of the task at hand, i.e., expectancy violations only activate the error system when the detected mismatch is classified as relevant for the specific goals in the current learning context. Additionally, a P3 to all deviant types was found reflecting a higher-order form of performance monitoring associated with evaluation of task-relevant events and updating of working memory contents.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 33 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 17%
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 14%
Researcher 5 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 7 20%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 49%
Neuroscience 6 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 19 October 2015.
All research outputs
#22,261,646
of 27,251,929 outputs
Outputs from Brain Research
#1,544
of 1,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,530
of 296,857 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain Research
#15
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,251,929 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,646 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 296,857 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.