↓ Skip to main content

Human Medial Frontal Cortex Activity Predicts Learning from Errors

Overview of attention for article published in Cerebral Cortex, December 2007
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
126 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
connotea
2 Connotea
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.
Title
Human Medial Frontal Cortex Activity Predicts Learning from Errors
Published in
Cerebral Cortex, December 2007
DOI 10.1093/cercor/bhm219
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert Hester, Natalie Barre, Kevin Murphy, Tim J. Silk, Jason B. Mattingley

Abstract

Learning from errors is a critical feature of human cognition. It underlies our ability to adapt to changing environmental demands and to tune behavior for optimal performance. The posterior medial frontal cortex (pMFC) has been implicated in the evaluation of errors to control behavior, although it has not previously been shown that activity in this region predicts learning from errors. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging, we examined activity in the pMFC during an associative learning task in which participants had to recall the spatial locations of 2-digit targets and were provided with immediate feedback regarding accuracy. Activity within the pMFC was significantly greater for errors that were subsequently corrected than for errors that were repeated. Moreover, pMFC activity during recall errors predicted future responses (correct vs. incorrect), despite a sizeable interval (on average 70 s) between an error and the next presentation of the same recall probe. Activity within the hippocampus also predicted future performance and correlated with error-feedback-related pMFC activity. A relationship between performance expectations and pMFC activity, in the absence of differing reinforcement value for errors, is consistent with the idea that error-related pMFC activity reflects the extent to which an outcome is "worse than expected."

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 5%
Germany 2 2%
France 2 2%
Canada 2 2%
Australia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Uruguay 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 107 85%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 30%
Researcher 38 30%
Professor > Associate Professor 11 9%
Professor 7 6%
Student > Master 6 5%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 10 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 42 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 17%
Neuroscience 19 15%
Engineering 7 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 6%
Other 9 7%
Unknown 20 16%
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 03 December 2013.
All research outputs
#15,286,644
of 22,733,113 outputs
Outputs from Cerebral Cortex
#3,509
of 4,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,833
of 155,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cerebral Cortex
#18
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,733,113 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 155,619 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.