↓ Skip to main content

Slow Is Also Fast: Feedback Delay Affects Anxiety and Outcome Evaluation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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.
Title
Slow Is Also Fast: Feedback Delay Affects Anxiety and Outcome Evaluation
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00020
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xukai Zhang, Yi Lei, Hang Yin, Peng Li, Hong Li

Abstract

Performance-related feedback plays an important role in improving human being's adaptive behavior. Using event-related potentials (ERPs), previous studies have associated a particular component, i.e., reward positivity (RewP), with outcome evaluation processing and found that this component was affected by waiting time before outcome evaluation. Prior research has also suggested that anxious individuals are more prone to detecting threats and susceptible to negative emotions, and show different patterns of brain activity in outcome evaluation. It is quite common that a decision-maker cannot receive feedback immediately; however, few studies have focused on the processing of delayed feedback, especially in subjects who exhibit trait anxiety. In this study, we recruited two groups of subjects with different trait anxiety levels and recorded ERPs when they conducted a time-estimation task with short (0.6-1 s) or long delayed (4-5 s) feedback. The ERP results during the cue phase showed that long waiting cues elicited more negative-going feedback-related negativity (FRN)-like component than short waiting cues in the high trait anxiety (HTA) group. More importantly, the two groups showed different patterns of ERP in the feedback condition. In the low trait anxiety (LTA) group, more positive-going RewP was found in the short-delayed than in the long-delayed condition. In contrast, no difference was found in the HTA group. This pattern may reflect the hyperactivity of the reward systems of HTA individuals in uncertain environments (e.g., the long-delay condition) compared with LTA individuals. Our results provide a direction for future research on the neural mechanisms of reinforcement learning and anxiety.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 21%
Researcher 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 11 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 30%
Neuroscience 6 11%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Engineering 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 17 32%
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 28 January 2018.
All research outputs
#17,927,741
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,733
of 7,192 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#310,147
of 441,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#134
of 145 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,192 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 441,127 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 145 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.