Action monitoring and medial frontal cortex: Leading role of supplementary motor area

Science

Volumn 343, Issue 6173, 2014, Pages 888-891

  Bonini, Francesca ^a,b,c,d   Burle, Boris ^a,c   Lieǵeois Chauvel, Catherine ^a,b   Reǵis, Jean ^a,b,d   Chauvel, Patrick ^a,b,d   Vidal, Franck ^a,c  

^a AIX MARSEILLE UNIVERSITY   (France)

^b AIX MARSEILLE UNIVERSITÉ   (France)

^c AIX MARSEILLE UNIVERSITÉ   (France)

^d TIMONE HOSPITAL   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ERROR ANALYSIS; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEM; NEUROLOGY; OPTIMIZATION;

ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR; EXECUTIVE FUNCTION; FRONTAL CORTEX; HUMAN; MEDIAL FRONTAL CORTEX; MONITORING; NERVE CELL NETWORK; NEUROPHYSIOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SUPPLEMENTARY MOTOR AREA;

EID: 84894285080     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: 10959203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.1247412     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. K. R. Ridderinkhof, M. Ullsperger, E. A. Crone, S. Nieuwenhuis, Science 306, 443-447 (2004).
2. V. van Veen, C. S. Carter, J. Cogn. Neurosci. 14, 593-602 (2002).
3. M. M. Botvinick, J. D. Cohen, C. S. Carter, Trends Cogn. Sci. 8, 539-546 (2004).
4. N. Picard, P. L. Strick, Cereb. Cortex 6, 342-353 (1996).
5. A sixth subject was not included (see note S1).
6. J. R. Simon, in Stimulus-Response Compatibility: An Integrated Perspective (R. W. Proctor, T. G. Reeve, Eds. (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1990), pp. 31-86.
7. H. G. Smid, G. Mulder, L. J. Mulder, Acta Psychol. (Amst.) 74, 169-201 (1990).
8. M. G. Coles, M. K. Scheffers, L. Fournier, Acta Psychol. (Amst.) 90, 129-144 (1995).
9. F. Vidal, T. Hasbroucq, J. Grapperon, M. Bonnet, Biol. Psychol. 51, 109-128 (2000).
10. M. Falkenstein, J. Hoormann, S. Christ, J. Hohnsbein, Biol. Psychol. 51, 87-107 (2000).
11. C. Roger, C. G. Bénar, F. Vidal, T. Hasbroucq, B. Burle, Neuroimage 51, 391-403 (2010).
12. Although the averaged activity in OMPFC in patient 3 was larger than activity in pACC, its signal/noise ratio was too low to reliably detect single-trial activity on a sufficient number of trials for analysis.
13. B. Burle, C. Roger, S. Allain, F. Vidal, T. Hasbroucq, J. Cogn. Neurosci. 20, 1637-1655 (2008).
14. H. Garavan, T. J. Ross, K. Murphy, R. A. P. Roche, E. A. Stein, Neuroimage 17, 1820-1829 (2002).
15. P. Luu, D. M. Tucker, D. Derryberry, M. Reed, C. Poulsen, Psychol. Sci. 14, 47-53 (2003).
16. M. J. Herrmann, J. Römmler, A. C. Ehlis, A. Heidrich, A. J. Fallgatter, Brain Res. Cogn. Brain Res. 20, 294-299 (2004).
17. K. D. Fitzgerald et al., Biol. Psychiatry 57, 287-294 (2005).
18. E. R. A. de Bruijn, F. P. de Lange, D. Y. von Cramon, M. Ullsperger, J. Neurosci. 29, 12183-12186 (2009).
19. V. Stuphorn, T. L. Taylor, J. D. Schall, Nature 408, 857-860 (2000).
20. K. W. Scangos, R. Aronberg, V. Stuphorn, J. Neurophysiol. 109, 1928-1939 (2013).
21. K. A. Kiehl, P. F. Liddle, J. B. Hopfinger, Psychophysiology 37, 216-223 (2000).
22. S. Debener et al., J. Neurosci. 25, 11730-11737 (2005).
23. E. E. Emeric et al., J. Neurophysiol. 99, 759-772 (2008).
24. S. Hoffmann, M. Falkenstein, Hum. Brain Mapp. 31, 1305-1315 (2010).
25. T. E. Ham et al., Cereb. Cortex 23, 703-713 (2013).
26. N. Kolling, T. E. J. Behrens, R. B. Mars, M. F. S. Rushworth, Science 336, 95-98 (2012).
27. P. Y. Chauvel, M. Rey, P. Buser, J. Bancaud, Adv. Neurol. 70, 199-209 (1996).
28. P. Nachev, C. Kennard, M. Husain, Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 9, 856-869 (2008).