Why do failure and errors matter so much? Why is the tendency to avoid failure and errors so ruling in some people? Why is such a tendency associated with maladaptive consequences? Motivated by these questions and guided by our previous work on the role of motivational tendencies in task-specific behavior, the project described in this presentation aims to investigate the possibility that fundamental differences in error-related processing and monitoring a) contribute to how we experience performance situations, b) influence behavioral regulation, and, subsequently, c) reinforce the development of certain types of achievement-related motivational tendencies. In simple terms, by adopting a neuroscientific approach to the study of individual differences in action monitoring and self-regulation, we seek to find neural markers of failure sensitivity and its behavioral consequences. In this presentation, I will describe the theoretical and conceptual background of the project as well as the actual implementation and realization of the empirical work. I will also illustrate the different aspects of the study with concrete findings. Finally, I will discuss both the theoretical and practical challenges of adopting a neuroscientific approach to the study of educational psychological phenomena, and, through the implications of our findings, comment on the recent discussion on the challenges and possibilities of bridging education and neuroscience.

Self-monitoring and action control are key skills in educational settings. The abilities to recognize and react to errors and to adaptively regulate on-going actions accordingly are crucial for both skill development and performance. In school settings, situations in which these dynamic processes take place are frequent. Both when a student seeks to learn something new and when he or she is to demonstrate what has been learned, the capabilities to focus on the task at hand, to suppress competing intentions, to resist temptations, and to reflect on one’s feelings and experiences while the situation unfolds become a necessity for effective and successful engagement.

            Our previous work has focused on the nature and development of motivational tendencies in general, and especially in the context of such learning and performance situations described above. This line of research has shown, for example, how certain types of motivational tendencies are systematically related to how students approach specific tasks and how they experience those situations and perform in them. Some of the most striking findings from this work that have crucially contributed to the initiative of the present project concern students’ tendency to avoid failures and demonstrations of incompetence. Evidence shows that such a tendency is a strong predictor of maladaptive self-protective behavior and impaired task engagement, and, in the long run, is associated with a heightened risk of depressive symptoms, exhaustion, and low self-esteem. These findings raise some interesting and important questions: Why do failure and errors matter so much? Why is the tendency to avoid failure and errors so ruling in some people? Why is such a tendency associated with maladaptive consequences?

            Guided and motivated by these questions, the purpose of the present project is to investigate the possibility that fundamental differences in action monitoring and self-regulation a) contribute to how we experience performance situations, b) influence behavioral regulation, and, subsequently, c) reinforce the development of certain types of achievement-related motivational tendencies.

By fundamental differences in action monitoring and self-regulation we refer to specific brain activities that take place while an individual performs a task, and especially when one commits errors and seeks to adjust the consequent behavior. We draw on recent neuroscientific research that has identified several types of brain activities (e.g., event-related brain potentials) that reflect performance monitoring in such a context. Thus, in simple terms, we are looking for neural markers of failure sensitivity and its behavioral consequences.

In order to examine our assumption that fundamental individual differences in error-related processing, indexed by the type of brain activity mentioned above, might predict individual differences in sensitivity to failure and even contribute to the development of failure-focused motivational tendencies, we have designed a series of studies in which we will record specific types of brain activity related to error processing, and then examine variation in this activity in relation to behavioral self-regulation and motivational tendencies as such and as a function of different task conditions. As our presumption is a novel one, yet plausible based on current findings in the field, we must first focus on the given phenomena on a general level before proceeding to more specific and developmental hypotheses. In the first stage, we have initiated a set of studies that examine 1) the basic characteristics of the brain activities associated with error processing in adult population using both electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetoencephalography (MEG); 2) the associations between components of error processing, specific motivational tendencies, behavioral responses and self-regulation, and psychophysiological indices of task-specific emotional reactions; and 3) the potential modulating role of task context. In the second stage, grounding on our findings from the first stage, we will examine age-related differences in the given neural components and related self-regulatory activities among children and adolescents. Finally, if we manage to detect all the key components and link them to specific individual differences in motivational tendencies even in younger children, the third stage will focus on the development of those components and their predictive influence on developing motivational tendencies from a longitudinal perspective.

In this presentation, I will describe the theoretical and conceptual background of the project as well as the actual implementation and realization of the empirical work. I will also illustrate the different aspects of the study with concrete findings. Finally, I will discuss both the theoretical and practical challenges of adopting a neuroscientific approach to the study of educational psychological phenomena, and, through the implications of our findings, comment on the recent discussion on the challenges and possibilities of bridging education and neuroscience.