Performance monitoring and error significance in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany.
Biological psychology (Impact Factor: 3.4). 02/2010; 84(2):257-63. DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2010.02.002
Source: PubMed


Performance monitoring has been consistently found to be overactive in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). The present study examines whether performance monitoring in OCD is adjusted with error significance. Therefore, errors in a flanker task were followed by neutral (standard condition) or punishment feedbacks (punishment condition). In the standard condition patients had significantly larger error-related negativity (ERN) and correct-related negativity (CRN) ampliudes than controls. But, in the punishment condition groups did not differ in ERN and CRN amplitudes. While healthy controls showed an amplitude enhancement between standard and punishment condition, OCD patients showed no variation. In contrast, group differences were not found for the error positivity (Pe): both groups had larger Pe amplitudes in the punishment condition. Results confirm earlier findings of overactive error monitoring in OCD. The absence of a variation with error significance might indicate that OCD patients are unable to down-regulate their monitoring activity according to external requirements.

Download full-text


Available from: Tanja Endrass, Aug 17, 2014
47 Reads
  • Source
    • "Overall, it seems that overactive performance monitoring in obsessive–compulsive individuals may only be observable in simple response-conflict tasks that include the overriding of an incorrect response and in which errors are easy to detect. This may reflect difficulties in OCD patients and individuals with OC symptoms to down-regulate monitoring in situations and tasks that do not require a careful monitoring of performance (Endrass et al., 2010). The described inconsistencies in results between tasks further suggest that error monitoring may occur differently across tasks (Cavanagh et al., 2010; Grundler et al., 2009) and this may differently be modulated by psychopathology like OCD (Grundler et al., 2009; Kaczkurkin, 2013; Mathews et al., 2012; Nieuwenhuis et al., 2005). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Both obsessive-compulsive disorder and subclinical obsessive-compulsive (OC) symptoms seem to be associated with hyperactive error-related brain activity. The current study examined performance monitoring in subjects with subclinical OC symptoms using a new task with different levels of difficulty. Nineteen subjects with high and 18 subjects with low OC characteristics performed a random dot cinematogram (RDC) task with three levels of difficulty. The high and low OC groups did not differ in error-related negativity (ERN), correct-related negativity (CRN) and performance irrespective of task difficulty. The amplitude of the ERN decreased with increasing difficulty whereas the magnitude of CRN did not vary. ERN and CRN approached in size and topography with increasing difficulty, which suggests that errors and correct responses are processed more similarly. These results add to a growing number of studies that fail to replicate hyperactive performance monitoring in individuals with OC symptoms in task with higher difficulty or requiring learning. Together with these findings our results suggest that the relationship between OC symptoms and performance monitoring may be sensitive to type of task and task characteristics and cannot be observed in a RDC that differs from typically used tasks in difficulty and the amount of response-conflict. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Brain and Cognition 08/2015; 98. DOI:10.1016/j.bandc.2015.05.002 · 2.48 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Such a bias could arise if, for example, one of the responses is associated with a larger reward than the other (Voss et al., 2004). Moreover, trait-like biases can influence the starting point; e.g., obsessive–compulsive disorder patients tend to increase their response monitoring, as indicated by the ERN (Endrass et al., 2008; Hajcak et al., 2008; Endrass et al., 2010; Mathews et al., 2012). The fourth parameter, i.e., the duration of nondecisional processes, quantifies processes such as basic encoding processes and/or the process of response execution (more specifically , motor activity). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Behavioral adaptation and cognitive control are crucial for goal-reaching behaviors. Every creature is ubiquitously faced with choices between behavioral alternatives. Common sense suggests that errors are an important source of information in the regulation of such processes. Several theories exist regarding cognitive control and the processing of undesired outcomes. However, most of these models focus on the consequences of an error, and less attention has been paid to the mechanisms that underlie the commissioning of an error. In this article, we present an integrative review of neuro-cognitive models that detail the determinants of the occurrence of response errors. The factors that may determine the likelihood of committing errors are likely related to the stability of task-representations in prefrontal networks, attentional selection mechanisms and mechanisms of action selection in basal ganglia circuits. An important conclusion is that the likelihood of committing an error is not stable over time but rather changes depending on the interplay of different functional neuro-anatomical and neuro-biological systems. We describe factors that might determine the time-course of cognitive control and the need to adapt behavior following response errors. Finally, we outline the mechanisms that may proof useful for predicting the outcomes of cognitive control and the emergence of response errors in future research.
    Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience 02/2015; 9. DOI:10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00050 · 3.27 Impact Factor
    • "Although many studies investigated ERN alterations, the subsequent Pe has received less attention in clinical studies. Studies investigating anxiety disorders, including OCD and GAD, did not observe significant group differences for this later positivity (Endrass et al., 2008, 2010; Riesel et al., 2011; Weinberg et al., 2010; Xiao et al., 2011). In contrast, several studies in MDD observed reduced Pe amplitudes (Aarts et al., 2013; Georgiadi et al., 2011; Olvet et al., 2010; Schrijvers et al., 2008, 2009; but see Chiu & Deldin, 2007; Holmes & Pizzagalli, 2008). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Overactive performance monitoring, indexed by greater error-related brain activity, has been frequently observed in individuals with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Similar alterations have been found in individuals with major depressive and generalized anxiety disorders. The main objective was to extend these findings by investigating performance monitoring in individuals with social anxiety disorder (SAD) and to evaluate the specificity of performance-monitoring changes in OCD. Event-related potentials were used to examine error-related brain activity during a flanker task in 24 individuals with OCD, 24 individuals with SAD, and 24 healthy controls with no history of neurological or psychiatric disorders. Error-related negativity (ERN) and correct-related negativity served as electrophysiological indicators for performance monitoring. Enhanced ERN was expected for both clinical groups, but differential associations with clinical symptoms were explored. ERN amplitudes were larger in individuals with OCD and SAD than in healthy controls. Correlational analyses did not reveal significant associations between ERN and clinical symptomatology in OCD, but a significant correlation with depressive symptoms was found in the SAD group. These findings further strengthen the idea that overactive performance monitoring is independent of clinical symptoms in OCD. Furthermore, it may also represent a transdiagnostic vulnerability indicator, although the relationship with clinical symptoms observed in the SAD group needs additional evaluation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved).
    Journal of Abnormal Psychology 10/2014; 123(4). DOI:10.1037/abn0000012 · 4.86 Impact Factor
Show more