PSY-4 A Preliminary Investigation of Tiered Valance Feedback on the FRN
Start Date
12-4-2024 9:30 AM
End Date
12-4-2024 11:30 AM
Location
University Readiness Center Greatroom
Document Type
Poster
Abstract
Electroencephalogram (EEG) research has demonstrated a specific type of brain response that occurs when participants are presented response feedback. This response shows as a negative electrical response from the scalp when feedback is presented and is termed the feedback related negativity (FRN) response. Research involving the FRN primarily focuses on the difference between positive valanced feedback given for correct responses, and negative valanced feedback given for incorrect responses during tasks where the participant’s goal is to respond accurately. However, there is little research that attempts to assess if tiered valanced feedback, such as incorrect versus severely incorrect, further impacts the FRN response. The current study seeks to examine the impact of tiered valanced feedback using an EEG and a time estimation task where participants are asked to simply estimate when one second passes following the presentation of a “Go” screen. After responding, participants are presented feedback on their accuracy in the form of a letter grade, and a time bar with an arrow that indicates their general performance. The arrow points directly to the center of the bar if participants responded within a small window around the 1,000 milliseconds (ms) (between 800 and 1200 ms) mark after presentation of the “Go” cue. This is accompanied by a grade of A+ in large red font. If participants were slightly faster or slightly slower (between 600 and 800 ms or between 1200 and 1400 ms), then the arrow points to the left (for faster), or to the right (for slower) of the middle of the bar. This would be accompanied by a grade of C+. If students responded much faster or slower (less than 600 ms or greater than 1400 ms), the arrow would present at the far left or far right of the bar. This would be accompanied by a grade of F. Additionally, as the goal was to ensure that participants received all three types of feedback, each time window would grow or shrink by either 10 or 15 ms according to participant performance. Participants are equipped with a 64-channel hydrocel EEG while completing the task to measure scalp related potentials associated with feedback. Preliminary results indicate an anticipated increase in negative amplitude for negatively valanced (incorrect and critically incorrect) feedback screens versus positive valanced (correct) feedback screens. However, no difference was found between the two tiers of negatively valanced (incorrect versus critically incorrect) feedback screens.
Keywords
Feedback Related Negativity; Electroencephalogram
PSY-4 A Preliminary Investigation of Tiered Valance Feedback on the FRN
University Readiness Center Greatroom
Electroencephalogram (EEG) research has demonstrated a specific type of brain response that occurs when participants are presented response feedback. This response shows as a negative electrical response from the scalp when feedback is presented and is termed the feedback related negativity (FRN) response. Research involving the FRN primarily focuses on the difference between positive valanced feedback given for correct responses, and negative valanced feedback given for incorrect responses during tasks where the participant’s goal is to respond accurately. However, there is little research that attempts to assess if tiered valanced feedback, such as incorrect versus severely incorrect, further impacts the FRN response. The current study seeks to examine the impact of tiered valanced feedback using an EEG and a time estimation task where participants are asked to simply estimate when one second passes following the presentation of a “Go” screen. After responding, participants are presented feedback on their accuracy in the form of a letter grade, and a time bar with an arrow that indicates their general performance. The arrow points directly to the center of the bar if participants responded within a small window around the 1,000 milliseconds (ms) (between 800 and 1200 ms) mark after presentation of the “Go” cue. This is accompanied by a grade of A+ in large red font. If participants were slightly faster or slightly slower (between 600 and 800 ms or between 1200 and 1400 ms), then the arrow points to the left (for faster), or to the right (for slower) of the middle of the bar. This would be accompanied by a grade of C+. If students responded much faster or slower (less than 600 ms or greater than 1400 ms), the arrow would present at the far left or far right of the bar. This would be accompanied by a grade of F. Additionally, as the goal was to ensure that participants received all three types of feedback, each time window would grow or shrink by either 10 or 15 ms according to participant performance. Participants are equipped with a 64-channel hydrocel EEG while completing the task to measure scalp related potentials associated with feedback. Preliminary results indicate an anticipated increase in negative amplitude for negatively valanced (incorrect and critically incorrect) feedback screens versus positive valanced (correct) feedback screens. However, no difference was found between the two tiers of negatively valanced (incorrect versus critically incorrect) feedback screens.