Neural correlates of error-monitoring and mindset: Back to the drawing board?

The different ways students deal with mistakes is an integral part of mindset theory. While previous error-monitoring studies found supporting neural evidence for mindset-related differences, they may have been confounded by overlapping stimulus processing. We therefore investigated the relationship...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Tieme W P Janssen, Smiddy Nieuwenhuis, Jamie Hoefakker, Patricia D Dreier Gligoor, Milene Bonte, Nienke van Atteveldt
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/9885e0a97911402992048ac406559ac8
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:9885e0a97911402992048ac406559ac8
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:9885e0a97911402992048ac406559ac82021-12-02T20:09:03ZNeural correlates of error-monitoring and mindset: Back to the drawing board?1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0254322https://doaj.org/article/9885e0a97911402992048ac406559ac82021-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254322https://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203The different ways students deal with mistakes is an integral part of mindset theory. While previous error-monitoring studies found supporting neural evidence for mindset-related differences, they may have been confounded by overlapping stimulus processing. We therefore investigated the relationship between mindset and event-related potentials (ERPs) of error-monitoring (response-locked Ne, Pe), with and without overlap correction. In addition, besides behavioral measures of remedial action after errors (post-error slowing and accuracy), we investigated their neural correlates (stimulus-locked N2). Results indicated comparable Ne, but larger Pe amplitudes in fixed-minded students; however, after overlap correction, the Pe results were rendered non-significant. A likely explanation for this overlap was a near-significant effect of mindset on the preceding stimulus P3. Finally, although N2 was larger for trials following errors, mindset was unrelated. The current study shows that the relationship between error-monitoring and mindset is more complex and should be reconsidered. Future studies are advised to explore stimulus processing as well, and if needed, to correct for stimulus overlap. In addition, contextual influences on and individual variation in error-monitoring need more scrutiny, which may contribute to refining mindset theory.Tieme W P JanssenSmiddy NieuwenhuisJamie HoefakkerPatricia D Dreier GligoorMilene BonteNienke van AtteveldtPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 16, Iss 7, p e0254322 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Tieme W P Janssen Smiddy Nieuwenhuis Jamie Hoefakker Patricia D Dreier Gligoor Milene Bonte Nienke van Atteveldt Neural correlates of error-monitoring and mindset: Back to the drawing board?
description	The different ways students deal with mistakes is an integral part of mindset theory. While previous error-monitoring studies found supporting neural evidence for mindset-related differences, they may have been confounded by overlapping stimulus processing. We therefore investigated the relationship between mindset and event-related potentials (ERPs) of error-monitoring (response-locked Ne, Pe), with and without overlap correction. In addition, besides behavioral measures of remedial action after errors (post-error slowing and accuracy), we investigated their neural correlates (stimulus-locked N2). Results indicated comparable Ne, but larger Pe amplitudes in fixed-minded students; however, after overlap correction, the Pe results were rendered non-significant. A likely explanation for this overlap was a near-significant effect of mindset on the preceding stimulus P3. Finally, although N2 was larger for trials following errors, mindset was unrelated. The current study shows that the relationship between error-monitoring and mindset is more complex and should be reconsidered. Future studies are advised to explore stimulus processing as well, and if needed, to correct for stimulus overlap. In addition, contextual influences on and individual variation in error-monitoring need more scrutiny, which may contribute to refining mindset theory.
format	article
author	Tieme W P Janssen Smiddy Nieuwenhuis Jamie Hoefakker Patricia D Dreier Gligoor Milene Bonte Nienke van Atteveldt
author_facet	Tieme W P Janssen Smiddy Nieuwenhuis Jamie Hoefakker Patricia D Dreier Gligoor Milene Bonte Nienke van Atteveldt
author_sort	Tieme W P Janssen
title	Neural correlates of error-monitoring and mindset: Back to the drawing board?
title_short	Neural correlates of error-monitoring and mindset: Back to the drawing board?
title_full	Neural correlates of error-monitoring and mindset: Back to the drawing board?
title_fullStr	Neural correlates of error-monitoring and mindset: Back to the drawing board?
title_full_unstemmed	Neural correlates of error-monitoring and mindset: Back to the drawing board?
title_sort	neural correlates of error-monitoring and mindset: back to the drawing board?
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/9885e0a97911402992048ac406559ac8
work_keys_str_mv	AT tiemewpjanssen neuralcorrelatesoferrormonitoringandmindsetbacktothedrawingboard AT smiddynieuwenhuis neuralcorrelatesoferrormonitoringandmindsetbacktothedrawingboard AT jamiehoefakker neuralcorrelatesoferrormonitoringandmindsetbacktothedrawingboard AT patriciaddreiergligoor neuralcorrelatesoferrormonitoringandmindsetbacktothedrawingboard AT milenebonte neuralcorrelatesoferrormonitoringandmindsetbacktothedrawingboard AT nienkevanatteveldt neuralcorrelatesoferrormonitoringandmindsetbacktothedrawingboard
_version_	1718375138569748480

Neural correlates of error-monitoring and mindset: Back to the drawing board?

Ejemplares similares