CCN Developmental Talks

EunSeon Ahn

Title: Continuous Tracking of Error-Related Potential via Electrocorticography in Humans

Abstract: The error-related negativity (ERN) is thought to be a neural-based performance monitoring mechanism used to identify and correct potential errors. While the ERN has been detected using a variety of cognitive and perceptual tasks, its research has been largely restricted to non-invasive neural recordings, limiting the understanding of the neural mechanisms that enable individuals to monitor self-performance in real-time. Moreover, previous studies using invasive electrocorticography recordings have only examined the ERN in highly discrete, artificial manner with a strict trial-by-trial design. To address these shortcomings, we sought to study the ERN with a more naturalistic task in a more continuous manner through a gamified experimental task. By doing so, we hope to address whether the ERN monitors errors in a continuous manner, reflecting the probability of error at any given time point, or in a more discrete manner, only when a definitive error occurs.

Madison Fansher

Title: Blinded by Scientists? How graphical depictions of data influence scientific reasoning

Abstract: The ability to evaluate evidence is becoming more and more critical in an era where information is readily available and consumed in mass quantities. In order to effectively evaluate research, the general public should have a basic understanding of fundamental research and statistical principles. One crucial skill is the ability to interpret correlational studies. Prior research has shown that consumers of scientific research may be influenced by trivial information such as the inclusion of formulas, brain images, and graphs. The current study examined how including a graph depicting a linear relationship between two variables influences the reader’s perception of the research, and whether it increases the likelihood of making a correlation/causation error.


Greg Stanley

Title: The Morality Game

Abstract: Trade-offs can reveal what someone truly values, but non-trade-offs may be less informative. Someone’s choice to advance their interests at the expense of another, or vice versa, can show how helpful, selfish, or trustworthy they are. Observers can use this information to predict this person’s future social choices and to decide how to interact with them. But observers must also base their social predictions and evaluations on situations where the interests of both parties are aligned, even though these don’t involve revealing self-other tradeoffs. We place participants in economic games that involve win-win versus lose-lose and win-lose versus lose-win scenarios. After observing the choice of another agent, participants first predict this agent’s possible next choice and then decide whether or not to give this agent the opportunity to choose, which is a form of trust. My talk will discuss my pilot study and preliminary results in the hope of getting suggestions for how to replicate it this semester.