Figure 1.
Illustration of the experimental task, which had a mixed 3 (Punishment Risk: No/Low/High) x Cognitive Conflict (Low/High) block/event design. The sequence of blocks (left) was randomized for each subject, with four blocks of each Punishment Risk level. Green color indicates No Risk blocks, yellow Low Rick blocks, and red High Risk blocks. A sequence of two example trials is shown to the right. Each block included 80 trials, where 75% was Low Conflict and 25% High Conflict. Note that images of actors from the Karolinska Directed Emotional Faces stimuli set were used in the actual experiment. For copyright reasons, these are represented by a silhouette.
Figure 2.
Performance accuracy as a function of Punishment Risk x Conflict.
High and Low Conflict is plotted separately to visualize the Punishment Risk x Conflict interaction. Error bars denote SE.
Figure 3.
Response time as a function of Conflict and Punishment Expectancy.
High and Low Conflict is plotted separately to visualize the Punishment Risk x Conflict interaction. Error bars denote SE.
Figure 4.
The effect of Punishment Risk x Conflict on cEMG (averaged over the whole trial).
Error bars denote SE.
Figure 5.
Time course of Error main effect Post-response.
The cEMG was amplified directly within 0–99 ms following error responses (p<.05). Error bars denote SE.
Figure 6.
Error x Punishment Risk interaction within 0–99 ms after the behavioral response.
The cEMG was amplified by High Risk following Errors but not Correct responses (p<.05). Error bars denote SE.
Figure 7.
The cEMG was amplified following Errors in the Experimental, but not the Control, group (p<.0001).
Error bars denote SE.