Topic: error monitoring

Metacognition has long been defined as “cognition about cognition”. One of its aspects is the error monitoring ability, which includes being aware of one’s own errors without external feedback. This ability is mostly investigated in two-alternative forced choice tasks, where the performance has all or none nature in terms of accuracy. The previous literature documents the effect of different influences on the error monitoring ability, such as working memory, feedback and sensorimotor involvement. However, these demonstrations fall short of generalizing to the real life scenarios where the erro

Error monitoring refers to the ability to monitor one's own task performance without explicit feedback. This ability is studied typically in two-alternative forced-choice (2AFC) paradigms. Recent research showed that humans can also keep track of the magnitude and direction of errors in different magnitude domains (e.g., numerosity, duration, length). Based on the evidence that suggests a shared mechanism for magnitude representations, we aimed to investigate whether metric error monitoring ability is commonly governed across different magnitude domains. Participants reproduced/estimated tempo

Does that title put you to sleep or pique your interest? The goal of my presentation is to introduce a powerful yet under-utilized mathematical equation that is surprisingly effective at uncovering spatiotemporal patterns that are embedded in data -- but that might be inaccessible in traditional analysis methods due to low SNR or sparse spatial distribution. If you flunked calculus, then don't worry: the math is really easy, and I'll spend most of the time discussing intuition, simulations, and applications in real data. I will also spend some time in the beginning of the talk providing a bird