ISSN 0439-755X
CN 11-1911/B

心理学报 ›› 2019, Vol. 51 ›› Issue (11): 1198-1207.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.01198

• 研究报告 • 上一篇    下一篇


朱树青, 翟昱, 贾世伟()   

  1. 山东师范大学心理学院, 济南 250014
  • 收稿日期:2018-11-28 出版日期:2019-11-25 发布日期:2019-09-24
  • 通讯作者: 贾世伟
  • 基金资助:
    * 国家自然科学基金项目(31200784)资助

Local context dependence in feedback evaluation: An ERP study

ZHU Shuqing, ZHAI Yu, JIA Shiwei()   

  1. School of Psychology, Shandong Normal University, Jinan 250014, China
  • Received:2018-11-28 Online:2019-11-25 Published:2019-09-24
  • Contact: JIA Shiwei


人脑对反馈的评估依赖于其所处背景。但是只能依赖整体背景(整个组块的结果范围), 还是可以依赖局部背景(单个试次的结果范围)进行评估, 目前并不清楚。本研究通过获益/损失线索操纵所在试次的反馈背景, 探讨反馈评估仅依赖整体背景, 还是可延伸到局部水平。25名被试参与实验。结果发现, 背景试次间变化时, 在获益背景下, ¥0 (负反馈)比+ ¥4 (正反馈)引发更负的FRN (feedback-related negativity); 在损失背景下, - ¥4 (负反馈)比¥0 (正反馈)引发更负的FRN。这一结果说明反馈评估以某线索背景中可能的结果为参考对象, FRN的背景依赖可以延伸到局部水平。结合前人研究, 推测任务类型和反馈真实性会调节背景依赖水平。在含真实反馈的主动性任务中, FRN的背景依赖效应可延伸至局部水平。

关键词: 反馈评估, 反馈相关负波(FRN), 整体背景依赖效应, 局部背景依赖效应


Previous research has indicated that feedback evaluation depends on its embedded context, and feedback related negativity (FRN) is also context-dependent. However, it is still disputed whether feedback evaluation merely relies on the global context (the range of all possible outcomes in a block) or also on the local context (the range of possible outcomes on a given trial). Thus, the current study investigated whether the context-dependent effect could be extended from the global context to the local context. We assumed that if feedback evaluation is in a global context-dependent manner, then all non-reward feedback in a given block should elicit a related negativity; however, if feedback evaluation is in a local context-dependent manner, then a related negativity should be discovered for the relative unfavorable feedback compared to the relative favorable feedback in a given trial context.

In this study, twenty-five healthy participants (17 females; Mage = 21.96 years old) performed a cued time-estimation task while EEG was recorded. Gain (a “+” surrounded with a circle)/loss (a “-” surrounded with a circle) cues were presented trial-by-trial at the beginning of each trial to indicate the context of this trial. Participants needed to estimate one second and then received factual feedback in accordance with their performance. In the gain context, correct and incorrect responses resulted in gain (+ ¥4; gain-favorable feedback) and no-gain (¥0; gain-unfavorable feedback), separately. In the loss context, correct and incorrect responses resulted in no-loss (¥0; loss-favorable feedback) and loss (- ¥4; loss-unfavorable feedback), separately.

The behavioral results indicated that larger trial-to-trial changes in time estimation were observed after relative unfavorable feedback than relative favorable feedback. The ERP results revealed that more negative FRN occurred after relative unfavorable feedback than relative favorable feedback in both the gain and loss contexts. In addition, there was no significant difference between gain-favorable and loss-favorable feedback or between gain-unfavorable and loss-unfavorable feedback. In addition, gain-unfavorable feedback elicited a more negative FRN than loss-favorable feedback, although, in fact, both were zero-value feedback.

The above results indicate that feedback evaluation relies on the local context. Based on the previous literature, we infer that the task and facticity of feedback are key factors giving rise to the discrepancies of the results between the previous studies and the current study. In passive tasks (i.e., the participants do not need to react), the good-bad binary evaluation of FRN cannot be observed as well as the context dependence effect. In active tasks with false feedback, global context dependence is found. In active tasks with factual feedback, the context dependence extends to the local level.

Key words: feedback evaluation, feedback-related negativity, global context dependence, local context dependence