Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 182, Issue 1, pp 119–124 | Cite as

Absent minded but accurate: delaying responses increases accuracy but decreases error awareness

  • Shani Shalgi
  • Redmond G. O’Connell
  • Leon Y. Deouell
  • Ian H. Robertson
Research Note

Abstract

Previous work has suggested that conscious error awareness may fluctuate with levels of attention. Here, we explore this relationship by showing that error awareness can be impaired when exogenous support to attentional systems is reduced by decreasing task demands. Twenty participants performed a manual Go/No-Go response-inhibition task optimized to examine error awareness. In one condition (Immediate), participants were asked to respond as quickly and as accurately as possible to each Go stimulus, and in the other condition (Delayed) they were asked to time their responses to the offset of the stimulus, thereby decreasing task difficulty and imposing a more automated response set. As expected, speeding increased the error rate. However, contrary to the expectation (and to participants’ subjective reports) that speeding would impair awareness of performance, we found the opposite to be true: errors were more likely to be unnoticed when the task was easier. We suggest that this tradeoff reflects two qualitatively different types of errors arising from the different cognitive demands of the Immediate and Delayed conditions. We propose that unaware errors reflect pure lapses of sustained attention and are therefore more susceptible to changes in task demands, while aware errors mostly reflect failures to inhibit responses, and are therefore most susceptible to increased response speed.

Keywords

Error awareness Sustained attention Speed–accuracy tradeoff 

References

  1. Arnsten AF, Contant TA (1992) Alpha-2 adrenergic agonists decrease distractibility in aged monkeys performing the delayed response task. Psychopharmacology 108:159–169PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beck DM, Rees G, Frith CD, Lavie N (2001) Neural correlates of change detection and change blindness. Nat Neurosci 4(6):645–650PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bekker EM, Overtoom CC, Kooij JJ, Buitelaar JK, Verbaten MN, Kenemans JL (2005) Disentangling deficits in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry 62(10):1129–1136PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Coull JT, Middleton HC, Robbins TW, Sahakian BJ (1995) Clonidine and diazepam have differential effects on tests of attention and learning. Psychopharmacology 120:322–332PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hart T, Giovannetti T, Montgomery MW, Schwartz MF (1998) Awareness of errors in naturalistic action after traumatic brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil 13(5):16–28PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hester R, Foxe JJ, Molholm S, Shpaner M, Garavan H (2005) Neural mechanisms involved in error processing: a comparison of errors made with and without awareness. Neuroimage 27(3):602–608PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Logan GD, Schachar RJ, Tannock R (1997) Impulsivity and inhibitory control. Psychol Sci 8:60–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Manly T, Owen AM, McAvinue L, Datta A, Lewis GH, Scott SK et al (2003) Enhancing the sensitivity of a sustained attention task to frontal damage: convergent clinical and functional imaging evidence. Neurocase 9(4):340–349PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Nieuwenhuis S, Ridderinkhof KR, Blom J, Band GP, Kok A (2001) Error-related brain potentials are differentially related to awareness of response errors: evidence from an antisaccade task. Psychophysiology 38(5):752–760PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. O’Connell RG, Dockree PM, Bellgrove MA, Kelly SP, Hester R, Garavan H et al (2007) The role of cingulate cortex in the detection of errors with and without awareness: a high-density electrical mapping study. Eur J Neurosci 25(8):2571–2579PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. O’Keeffe FM, Dockree PM, Moloney P, Carton S, Robertson IH (2007) Characterising error-awareness of attentional lapses and inhibitory control failures in patients with traumatic brain injury. Exp Brain Res 180(1):59–67PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Prigatano GP, Schacter DL (1991) Awareness of deficit after brain injury: clinical and theoretical issues. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Robertson IH, Manly T, Andrade J, Baddeley BT, Yiend J (1997) ‘Oops!’: performance correlates of everyday attentional failures in traumatic brain injured and normal subjects. Neuropsychologia 35(6):747–758PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rock I, Linnett CM, Grant P, Mack A (1992) Perception without attention: results of a new method. Cognit Psychol 24(4):502–534PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Simons DJ, Chabris CF (1999) Gorillas in our midst: sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception 28(9):1059–1074PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Smith A, Nutt D (1996) Noradrenaline and attention lapses. Nature 380:291PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sturm W, Willmes K (2001) On the functional neuroanatomy of intrinsic and phasic alertness. Neuroimage 14:S76–S84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Stuss DT, Murphy KJ, Binns MA, Alexander MP (2003) Staying on the job: the frontal lobes control individual performance variability. Brain 126(Pt 11):2363–2380PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shani Shalgi
    • 1
    • 2
  • Redmond G. O’Connell
    • 2
  • Leon Y. Deouell
    • 3
  • Ian H. Robertson
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Cognitive ScienceThe Hebrew University of JerusalemJerusalemIsrael
  2. 2.School of Psychology and Trinity College Institute of NeuroscienceTrinity College DublinDublin 2Ireland
  3. 3.Department of Psychology and the Interdisciplinary Center for Neural ComputationThe Hebrew University of JerusalemJerusalemIsrael

Personalised recommendations