In decision-making processes, the relevance of the information yielded by outcomes varies across time and situations. It increases when previous predictions are not accurate and in contexts with high environmental uncertainty. Previous fMRI studies have shown an important role of medial pFC in coding both reward prediction errors and the impact of this information to guide future decisions. However, it is unclear whether these two processes are dissociated in time or occur simultaneously, suggesting that a common mechanism is engaged. In the present work, we studied the modulation of two electrophysiological responses associated to outcome processing—the feedback-related negativity ERP and frontocentral theta oscillatory activity—with the reward prediction error and the learning rate. Twenty-six participants performed two learning tasks differing in the degree of predictability of the outcomes: a reversal learning task and a probabilistic learning task with multiple blocks of novel cue–outcome associations. We implemented a reinforcement learning model to obtain the single-trial reward prediction error and the learning rate for each participant and task. Our results indicated that midfrontal theta activity and feedback-related negativity increased linearly with the unsigned prediction error. In addition, variations of frontal theta oscillatory activity predicted the learning rate across tasks and participants. These results support the existence of a common brain mechanism for the computation of unsigned prediction error and learning rate.

Feedback-related negativity (FRN) is an ERP component that distinguishes positive from negative feedback. FRN has been hypothesized to be the product of an error signal that may be used to adjust future behavior. In addition, associative learning models assume that the trial-to-trial learning of cue–outcome mappings involves the minimization of an error term. This study evaluated whether FRN is a possible electrophysiological correlate of this error term in a predictive learning task where human subjects were asked to learn different cue–outcome relationships. Specifically, we evaluated the sensitivity of the FRN to the course of learning when different stimuli interact or compete to become a predictor of certain outcomes. Importantly, some of these cues were blocked by more informative or predictive cues (i.e., the blocking effect). Interestingly, the present results show that both learning and blocking affect the amplitude of the FRN component. Furthermore, independent analyses of positive and negative feedback event-related signals showed that the learning effect was restricted to the ERP component elicited by positive feedback. The blocking test showed differences in the FRN magnitude between a predictive and a blocked cue. Overall, the present results show that ERPs that are related to feedback processing correspond to the main predictions of associative learning models.

An increase in cognitive control has been systematically observed in responses produced immediately after the commission of an error. Such responses show a delay in reaction time (post-error slowing) and an increase in accuracy. To characterize the neurophysiological mechanism involved in the adaptation of cognitive control, we examined oscillatory electrical brain activity by electroencephalogram and its corresponding neural network by event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging in three experiments. We identified a new oscillatory theta-beta component related to the degree of post-error slowing in the correct responses following an erroneous trial. Additionally, we found that the activity of the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, the right inferior frontal cortex, and the right superior frontal cortex was correlated with the degree of caution shown in the trial following the commission of an error. Given the overlap between this brain network and the regions activated by the need to inhibit motor responses in a stop-signal manipulation, we conclude that the increase in cognitive control observed after the commission of an error is implemented through the participation of an inhibitory mechanism.