Effects of Locus of Control on the Neural Mechanism of Error Processing

by

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Kaylie Carbine and Dr. Michael Larson, Department of Psychology and Neuroscience

Introduction

Performance monitoring is the ability to assess behavior and make necessary adjustments (Ullsperger & von Cramon, 2001). Performance monitoring can be examined through event-related potentials (ERPs), which are indicators of the brain’s electrical activity in response to a specific stimulus (Luck, 2005). One specific ERP is the error-related negativity (ERN), which is a negative peak that occurs 50 to 100 ms after an erroneous response (Dehaene, Posner, & Tucker, 1994; Gehring, Goss, Coles, Meyer, & Donchin, 1993). Although there are many theories regarding the functional significance of the ERN, it is believed to signal when there is an internal detection of conflict between correct and erroneous response options (Olvet & Hajcak, 2008).

Individuals diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) and schizophrenia exhibit decreased ERN amplitudes compared to healthy individuals, suggesting they have difficulty internally monitoring for errors (Bates, Kiehl, Laurens, & Liddle, 2002; South, Larson, Krauskopf, & Clawson, 2010). One possible factor that may influence this deficit is locus of control. Locus of control is one’s perceived control over the environment and situation (Rotter, 1990). Individuals with a more internal locus of control believe they have greater control over situations and can influence their environment. On the other hand, those with a more external locus of control believe they have less control and that the environment influences them. Consequently, those with a more external locus of control may not internally monitor their performance as closely, since they believe their actions will not have as much influence over the situation, therefore resulting in decreased ERN amplitude. In addition, individuals with psychiatric disorders like schizophrenia have also been noted to have a more external locus of control (Harrow, Hansford, & Astrachan-Fletcher, 2009).

We hypothesized that individuals with a more external locus of control will exhibit smaller ERN amplitudes. If locus of control is a characteristic of certain pathologies and if ERN amplitudes are correlated with different degrees of locus of control, the relationship would further support the notion that deficits in ERN amplitude reflect psychopathological characteristics. In addition, because performance monitoring is crucial to learning and behavioral adjustment, identifying and understanding influential factors of error monitoring is important. As far as we know, our study is the first step in discovering if locus of control is an additional influence on the mechanisms of error processing.

Methodology

To elicit the ERN, we used a modified Eriksen Flanker task (Eriksen & Eriksen,1974). In the Flanker task, the participants are shown a line of five horizontal arrows and must identify the direction of the middle arrow. Half of the trials are congruent (<<<<<) and half are incongruent (<<><<). The ERN was recorded using electroencephalogram (EEG) technology. During the Flanker task, each participant wore an EEG net of 128 electrode sensors. ERP data was recorded on a separate computer, indicating when the stimulus was presented, when the participant responded, and if the participant responded correctly. Reaction time (RT) and accuracy were also recorded. Locus of control was measured through Rotter’s Internal-External Locus of Control (I-E) Scale, putting participants on a spectrum from internal to external locus of control (Rotter, 1966). Participants also completed the Beck Depression Inventory, Second Edition, and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Data analysis was conducted using multiple regression with locus of control and self-reported depression and anxiety levels as predictors of ERN amplitude. We had 173 participants (91 female), aged 18-25 (M=20.54, SD=2.001). Participants were predominately right handed (98.3%) and all free of any neurological diseases, psychiatric illnesses, learning disabilities, or head injuries that caused unconsciousness.

Results

As expected, incongruent trials were significantly associated with increased RT and decreased accuracy (ps< 0.01). Similarly, amplitude of the ERN was more negative on error trials than correct trials (p<.01), indicating that the Flanker task was successful in eliciting error responses. Correlation and regression analyses showed no significant relationships between ERN amplitude and indices of locus control, whether or not depression or anxiety were controlled (all p values > .05).

Discussion

Contrary to our hypothesis, a more external locus of control was not associated with decreased ERN amplitude. Results show that those with an internal or external locus of control did not differ in neural manifestations of internal performance monitoring. Our results imply that for psychological disorders, particularly ASD and schizophrenia, locus of control may not be a significant factor in modifying neural indices of error monitoring.

Conclusion

Our hypothesis was that those with a more external locus of control would exhibit decreased ERN amplitudes. Our results did not support our hypotheses, showing no significant relationship between locus of control and neural indices of internal error monitoring. However, future studies may wish to examine additional ERPs that are involved in performance monitoring to see if there exists a relationship between locus of control and certain aspects of performance monitoring.

References

  • Bates, A.T., Kiehl, K.A., Laurens, K.R., & Liddle, P.F. (2002). Error-related negativity and correct response negativity in schizophrenia. Clinical Neurophysiology, 113(9), 1454–1463.
  • Dehaene, S., Posner, M. I., & Tucker, D. M. (1994). Localization of a neural system for error detection and compensation. Psychological Science, 5(5), 303-305.
  • Eriksen, B.A., & Eriksen, C.W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a non-search task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16, 143-149.
  • Gehring, W.J., & Willoughby, A.R. (2002). The medial frontal cortex and the rapid processing of monetary gains and losses. Science, 295, 2279–2282.
  • Harrow, M., Hansford, B.G., & Astrachan-Fletcher, E.B. (2009). Locus of control: Relation to schizophrenia, to recovery, and to depression and psychosis—A 15- year longitudinal study. Psychiatry Research, 168(3), 186-192. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2008.06.002
  • Luck, S. J. (2005). An introduction to the event-related potential technique. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
  • Olvet, D., & Hajcak, G., 2008. The error-related negativity (ERN) and psychopathology: Toward an endophenotype. Clinical Psychology Review, 28(8), 1343–1354.
  • Rotter, J.B. (1990). Internal verses external control of reinforcement: A case history of a variable. American Psychologist, 45(4), 489-493. doi:10.1037/0003- 066X.45.4.489
  • Rotter, J.B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal verses external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80(1), 1-28. doi:10.1037/h0092976
  • South, M., Larson, M.J., Krauskopf, E., & Clawson, A. (2010). Error processing in high functioning autism spectrum disorders. Biological Psychology 85(2), 242–251.
  • Ullsperger, M., Yves von Cramon, D. (2001). Subprocesses of performance monitoring: Dissociation of error processing and response competition revealed by eventrelated fMRI and ERPs. NeuroImage, 14(6), 1387-1401.