Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-kv2lp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-05T17:32:55.316Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Error-processing abnormalities in pediatric anxiety and obsessive compulsive disorders

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 June 2015

Kate D. Fitzgerald  and
Stephan F. Taylor
Kate D. Fitzgerald*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
Stephan F. Taylor
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
*
*Address for correspondence, Kate Fitzgerald, MD, University of Michigan – Psychiatry, 4250 Plymouth Rd., Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA. (Email: krd@med.umich.edu)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Anxiety and obsessive compulsive disorders are among the earliest occurring psychopathology and may derive from atypical maturation of neural networks for error processing. Psychological models have alternately suggested that over-detection of errors, excessive caring about errors, or failure of errors to elicit regulatory control could associate with the expression of anxiety. In this review article, the potential relevance of error processing for anxiety and obsessive compulsive disorders is described in the context of neurophysiological and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) research demonstrating altered brain response to errors in pediatric and adult patients. Finally, hypotheses about developmentally sensitive mechanisms of anxiety and obsessive compulsive disorders are drawn from the extant literature, and avenues for clinical translation are discussed.

Keywords

Anterior cingulateanxietydevelopmentdorsolateral prefrontal cortexerror-processingerror-related negativityobsessive-compulsivepediatricventromedial prefrontal cortex

Information

Type
Review Articles
Information
CNS Spectrums , Volume 20 , Special Issue 4: Pediatric Neuroimaging , August 2015 , pp. 346 - 354
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2015 

Introduction

Anxiety and obsessive-compulsive disorders are among the earliest occurring psychopathology, with onset during childhood or adolescence in half of all patients.Reference Kessler, Berglund, Demler, Jin, Merikangas and Walters 1 High rates of comorbidity, overlapping phenomenology, and developmental fluidity between these disorders suggest common underlying mechanisms.Reference Kessler, Ormel and Petukhova 2 The early emergence of symptoms may derive from atypical maturation of mechanisms underlying self regulation,Reference Casey, Pattwell, Glatt and Lee 3 including neural substrates for error processing. In adolescent and adult patients, increased midline prefrontal, electrophysiological response to errors has been consistently documented,Reference Olvet and Hajcak 4 , Reference Moser, Moran, Schroder, Donnellan and Yeung 5 and, recent work in children implicates abnormal neural mechanisms for error-processing from the earliest stages of illness. However, the functional significance of these electrophysiological signals remains unclear. In this review, we will consider several possibilities, integrating findings across electrophysiological and functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based studies in pediatric and adult patients. We will describe neural networks associated with error-processing, including substrate for affective valuation (how important an error is) and cognitive control (the ability to adjust behavior in response to errors or situations in which errors are likely). We conclude by hypothesizing that imbalances in these aspects of error processing may underlie obsessive compulsive and anxiety disorders, and may vary with age to represent developmentally sensitive targets for intervention.

The Relevance of Error Processing for Anxiety and Obsessive Compulsive Disorders: Theory and Electrophysiological Support

In 1987, PitmanReference Pitman 6 suggested that the symptoms of OCD might originate with dysfunction in a comparator system that compares an internal goal with a perceived outcome, generating a mismatch, or error signal, when the perceived outcome does not match with intention, leading to performance adjustments. According to this “cybernetic theory,” in OCD, larger error signals (mismatches) are generated, leading to compulsive rituals to correct the mismatch, eg, repeated checking to ensure safety.Reference Pitman 6 The discovery of the error-related negativity (ERN), a negative amplitude, event-related potential (ERP) that occurs 50–100 msec after an erroneous response, permitted a test of this hypothesis. Indeed, in 2000, Gehring et al Reference Gehring, Himle and Nisenson 7 reported elevated ERN in patients with OCD in response to errors on a simple cognitive task that does not elicit OCD symptoms. The finding has since been replicated in multiple samples of adultReference Endrass and Ullsperger 8 and pediatric patientsReference Hajcak, Franklin, Foa and Simons 9 – Reference Carrasco, Hong and Nienhuis 11 (see Table 1). Although the details of what causes the increased error signal were not specified (deficient comparator, overly low threshold for mismatch detection, unobtainable internal goals), the cognitive neuroscience approach of performance monitoring—detecting errors and adjusting behavior—held out the promise of a mechanistic understanding of OCD.

Table 1

Error-related negativity (ERN) and pediatric obsessive compulsive and anxiety disorders: a summary of the published literature

Anxiety disorder (AD) samples included generalized anxiety disorder, separation anxiety disorder, social phobia, and specific phobia. There were no obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) diagnoses in any AD sample, except for the study by Meyer et al,20 in which 2 of 48 AD patients had comorbid OCD (with other ADs). HC=healthy control; ERN=error-related negativity; CBT=cognitive behavior therapy; US=unaffected siblings; SCARED=Screen for Child Anxiety Related Disorders; CDI=Child Depression Inventory; BI=behavioral inhibition.

* OCS=obsessive compulsive symptoms in a community (ie, nonclinical) ranged from none to subclinical based on parent report on the obsessive-compulsive subscale of the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) (Achenbach, 1991). Non-OCD anxiety symptoms (AS) were also examined in the same sample using the CBCL.

a,b,c Partial subject overlap across studies.

Table 2

fMRI studies of error-processing in pediatric obsessive compulsive and anxiety disorders: a summary of the published literature

OCD=obsessive-compulsive disorder; AD=anxiety disorders including generalized anxiety disorder, separation anxiety disorder, social phobia and specific phobia; CBT=cognitive behavioral therapy; HC=healthy controls; MSIT=Multisource Interference Task.

However, it soon became apparent that hyperactive ERN is not specific to OCD. ERN hyperactivity also occurs in non-OCD anxiety and in relationship to anxious temperament in nonclinical populations, including in pediatric samples.Reference Olvet and Hajcak 4 , Reference Moser, Moran, Schroder, Donnellan and Yeung 5 , Reference Endrass and Ullsperger 8 , Reference Lahat, Lamm, Chronis-Tuscano, Pine, Henderson and Fox 12 , Reference McDermott, Perez-Edgar, Henderson, Chronis-Tuscano, Pine and Fox 13 . Interestingly, ERN magnitudes are reduced in persons with psychotic disordersReference Foti, Kotov, Bromet and Hajcak 14 and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder,Reference Geburek, Rist, Gediga, Stroux and Pedersen 15 leading some investigators to hypothesize that a hyperactive response to errors is a sign of internalizing disorders.Reference Olvet and Hajcak 4

What, then, is the function of hyperactive error responses in obsessive compulsive and anxiety disorders, in general, and in pediatric patients in particular? Several possible theories relating increased ERN to anxiety have been suggested. Anxiety involves the anticipation of future threat or the worry of an imminent bad outcome. Clinically, it manifests across a spectrum of disorders in children, eg, excessive fear of bad consequences due to temporary separation from parents (separation anxiety), being observed by peers (social anxiety), minor mistakes carrying out “every day” concerns (generalized anxiety), or accidental harm to self or loved ones (OCD). Thus, increased ERN may reflect a source of worry, indexing increased affective valuation of errorsReference Olvet and Hajcak 4 , Reference Proudfit, Inzlicht and Mennin 16 and driving obsessions or worries about errors leading to bad outcomes. Alternatively, it is possible that an increased ERN reflects a compensatory response for deficiencies in control systems, and that these deficits give rise to anxiety,Reference Bishop 17 as detailed in the next section. Another recent theory posits that increased ERN may reflect a secondary effect of anxiety on the brain, rather than a source of anxiety itself; specifically, Moser et al Reference Moser, Moran, Schroder, Donnellan and Yeung 5 suggested that increased ERN may signify a mechanism by which anxious individuals re-activate task goals, in the face of distracting levels of anxiety, to maintain normal performance. In this scenario, an increased ERN occurs to prevent decrements in performance due to anxiety, but the ERN does not directly contribute to anxiety expression.

These theoretical explanations are important steps in understanding the mechanistic significance of increased ERN in OCD and anxiety disorders, but a definitive explanation has yet to emerge. However, in combination with neuroimaging studies, the performance monitoring approach has begun to shed light on neurocircuits that may underlie anxiety. As we will postulate below, imbalanced engagement of brain circuits involved in affective valuation of performance and those engaged in control of performance may combine to drive symptom expression.

Neurodevelopment of ERN in Anxious Youth

Emerging research shows interactions between developmental stage and the relationship of ERN to anxiety in children that, hypothetically, could derive from differential development of affective valuation relative to cognitive control during error-processing. For instance, greater ERN amplitude has been associated with higher levels of subclinical anxiety in early adolescence (11–13 years),Reference Meyer, Weinberg, Klein and Hajcak 18 which is consistent with findings in older youth,Reference Hanna, Carrasco and Harbin 10 , Reference Carrasco, Hong and Nienhuis 11 , Reference Ladouceur, Dahl, Birmaher, Axelson and Ryan 19 whereas the opposite pattern was observed in younger children (greater ERN with lower levels of subclinical anxiety at 8–10 years).Reference Meyer, Weinberg, Klein and Hajcak 18 Even further complexity is suggested by the finding that young children with clinically significant anxiety exhibit increased ERN relative to age-matched healthy controls.Reference Meyer, Hajcak and Torpey 20

At this stage, these findings are not completely reconciled, but suggest complex interactions between error processing, developmental stage, and severity of anxiety. In prepubertal children with low subclinical anxiety,Reference Meyer, Weinberg, Klein and Hajcak 18 greater ERN amplitude may reflect effective signaling for higher level cognitive control, which, in turn, could mitigate subclinical anxiety symptoms by enabling behavioral adjustment (e.g., switching from repetitive worries or compulsions to more appropriate, less anxious behaviors).Reference Muris, van der Pennen, Sigmond and Mayer 21 In contrast, in prepubertal children with clinically significant anxietyReference Meyer, Hajcak and Torpey 20 and in postpubertal individuals with subclinical to clinical levels of severity,Reference Olvet and Hajcak 4 , Reference Moser, Moran, Schroder, Donnellan and Yeung 5 , Reference Endrass and Ullsperger 8 , Reference Meyer, Weinberg, Klein and Hajcak 18 increased ERN could reflect increased affective valuation of errors, unresponsive control system driving error signal up, and/or an imbalance between these processes. Emerging research supports the contribution of both affective and cognitive subcomponents of error-processing to the ERNReference Edwards, Calhoun and Kiehl 22 —sub-components that may mature at different time points and may differentially contribute to ERN–anxiety associations during specific periods of development.

A Neural Network for Affective Valuation and Cognitive Control in Response to Errors: Evidence from fMRI

Functional neuroimaging research has provided important data about possible neural substrates of the ERN in particular, and error processing in general, that can inform theory linking this psychological function to anxiety and OCD. For instance, functional MRI (fMRI) has been combined with electrophysiological methods in healthy individuals to localize the ERN to dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC),Reference Mathalon, Whitfield and Ford 23 , Reference Debener, Ullsperger, Siegel, Fiehler, von Cramon and Engel 24 as well as rostral ACC,Reference Edwards, Calhoun and Kiehl 22 , Reference Mathalon, Whitfield and Ford 23 , Reference Agam, Hämäläinen and Lee 25 mid-cingulate,Reference Agam, Hämäläinen and Lee 25 lateral prefrontal cortex,Reference Edwards, Calhoun and Kiehl 22 , Reference Doñamayor, Heilbronner and Münte 26 and inferior parietal cortex.Reference Doñamayor, Heilbronner and Münte 26 Historically, most of the fMRI research on error processing has focused on the posterior medial frontal cortex (pMFC), encompassing dACC and pre-SMA,Reference Ridderinkhof, Ullsperger, Crone and Nieuwenhuis 27 which operates as part of a system of dissociable neural networks that regulate cognitive and affective response to errorsReference Sridharan, Levitin and Menon 28 (Figure 1). In healthy individuals, the pMFC co-activates with anterior insula across a wide variety of tasks,Reference Sridharan, Levitin and Menon 28 comprising a network that is centrally involved in performance monitoring to integrate external task demands with internal motivational state.Reference Allman, Hakeem, Erwin, Nimchinsky and Hof 29 – Reference Cavanaugh and Shackman 32 During performance monitoring, the pMFC also co-activates with other regions, such as dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC), to mediate adjustments in behavioral response to external task demands.Reference Kerns, Cohen, MacDonald, Cho, Stenger and Carter 33 While the pMFC is anatomically linked to motor and pre-motor areas that carry out response selection, the anterior insula plays a more prominent role in detecting salience (both externally and internally cued) through bidirectional projections to pMFC and emotion processing regions, such as the ventro-medial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC).Reference Barbas 34 The vmPFC, a brain region that evaluates the significance of stimuli and events,Reference Roy, Shohamy and Wager 35 – Reference Taylor, Martis and Fitzgerald 37 normally deactivates with errors and exhibits a reciprocal, anti-correlated relationship with the pMFC and anterior insula.

Figure 1

Schematic illustration of performance monitoring and proposed disruptions in OCD. (A) In healthy subjects, components of the performance monitoring network include the pMFC working in concert with the anterior insula (aIns) to monitor behavior and detect mismatches (errors), and then send a signal to the dlPFC, which increases control to suppress unwanted interference and improve performance. The vmPFC, which typically deactivates during tasks that require an external focus of attention, also modulates activity in the pMFC and aIns, possibly to provide a signal that determines the value of a task and a subsequent error. (B) In OCD, evidence suggests that several of these components are disrupted (although results in children and adults differ slightly). Activity is increased in the monitoring nodes (pMFC and anterior insula, aIns), and the connection between the vmPFC and aIns is increased, which may signal the greater negative valuation that OCD patients place on errors. Other disrupted nodes may include the pMFC-dlPFC connection, and a weakened ability to overcome interfering activity from valuation centers that drive compulsive behaviors.

The networks that support performance monitoring functions mature dramatically in adolescents,Reference Rubia, Smith, Taylor and Brammer 38 – Reference Davies, Segalowitz and Gavin 41 which provides a context for considering how pathological development of these networks could contribute to pediatric anxiety disorders. Closely related to performance monitoring are executive functions that resolve conflict between competing response options, thus adjusting performance to overcome interference. According to conflict theory, errors are merely a manifestation of unsuccessfully processing response options that interfere with one another.Reference Yeung, Cohen and Botvinick 42 , Reference Carter, Braver, Barch, Botvinick, Noll and Cohen 43 In typically developing youth, age-related changes in the location of midline prefrontal activation, from more rostral (vmPFC) to more dorsal areas (pMFC), have been observed for conflict-processing,Reference Perkins, Welsh, Stern, Taylor and Fitzgerald 44 as well as emotion regulation.Reference Perlman and Pelphrey 45 These findings suggest that mobilization of networks involved in task control (eg, pMFC), over those involved in affective valuation (eg, vmPFC), could contribute to the maturation of capacity for performance monitoring. Studies of connectivity between network nodes for task control (pMFC, dlPFC, anterior insula) and affective valuation (vmPFC), at rest and during task, support this notion. With age, resting state connectivity between pMFC and anterior insula increases, while connectivity with vmPFC decreases.Reference Fair, Dosenbach and Church 46 Age-related increases in functional coupling between vmPFC and dlPFC support improved performance in children during tasks that require cognitive control over affective valuation,Reference Steinbeis, Haushofer, Fehr and Singer 47 implicating interactions between nodes for cognitive and affective aspects of performance monitoring in its maturation.

Increased pMFC-Based Error-Signaling in OCD and Anxiety Disorders: An Adaptive Response for the Recruitment of Cognitive Control?

In adult OCD, imaging studies of error-processing have shown increased pMFC activation,Reference Ursu, Stenger, Shear, Jones and Carter 48 as well as greater activation of more rostral aspects of the ACC.Reference Fitzgerald, Welsh and Gehring 49 , Reference Maltby, Tolin, Worhunsky, O’Keefe and Kiehl 50 Hyperactivation of the pMFC to cognitive conflict has also been reported by some,Reference Ursu, Stenger, Shear, Jones and Carter 48 , Reference Maltby, Tolin, Worhunsky, O’Keefe and Kiehl 50 , Reference Yucel, Harrison and Wood 51 but not all studies of adult OCD.Reference Fitzgerald, Welsh and Gehring 49 , Reference Stern, Welsh and Fitzgerald 52 In patients with pediatric OCD (8–19 years), increased pMFC activation occurs during high-conflict trials (collapsed across correct and incorrect)Reference Fitzgerald, Stern and Angstadt 53 and when errors are examined in separation.Reference Huyser, Veltman, Wolters, de Haan and Boer 54

The role of pMFC hyperactivation in OCD during performance monitoring remains unclear, but recent clinical translation work provides some clues. In an fMRI study of patients with pediatric OCD before and after cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), Huyser et al Reference Huyser, Veltman, Wolters, de Haan and Boer 54 found that conflict-related pMFC and dlPFC activity increases associated with symptom improvement. The relationship of increasing pMFC and dlPFC activity with decreasing OCD severity suggests that greater activation of these regions may reflect a compensatory mechanism, enhanced by CBT, to enable young patients to control symptoms. That is, patients typically endorse insight that their anxiety-provoking obsessions are excessive, 55 raising the possibility that feared outcomes are appropriately detected as “thinking errors,”Reference Gilbert 56 but cognitive control is insufficiently engaged, allowing symptoms to persist. In other words, greater pMFC activity may reflect conflict between intentions and affect—the normal “security concerns” that become exaggerated in OCDReference Szechtman and Woody 57 —and not errors, per se, but situations where errors are perceived as possible. Signaling by pMFC may enable engagement of dlPFC to implement cognitive controlReference Cavanaugh and Shackman 32 , Reference Kerns, Cohen, MacDonald, Cho, Stenger and Carter 33 over inappropriate intrusion of affect during task execution in OCD. In theory, this mechanism would support response to CBT, which teaches patients to ignore anxiety induced by obsessions as a “false alarm” and resist compulsive urges until the anxiety fades away.Reference Schwartz 58

Functional neuroimaging research in patients with non-OCD anxiety disorders has traditionally employed emotion-inducing, rather than error-eliciting, cognitive conflict tasks, but recent work supports the possibility that anxiety could manifest as the result of impoverished recruitment of prefrontal cortical control. Some studies of non-OCD anxiety have examined cognitive control over emotion, and these studies show excessive pMFC activation to emotional conflict,Reference van den Heuvel, Veltman and Groenewegen 59 but reduced dlPFC recruitment during tasks requiring the regulation of emotional response.Reference Goldin, Manber, Hakimi, Canli and Gross 60 During non-emotional cognitive conflict, higher levels of trait anxiety in healthy adults associate with exaggerated electrophysiological response in an area of midline prefrontal cortex that may localize to pMFC,Reference Moser, Moran and Jendrusina 61 , Reference Righi, Mecacci and Viggiano 62 but reduced dlPFC recruitment.Reference Bishop 17 In our own work, we have found reduced dlPFC activation to errors in pediatric OCD and non-OCD anxiety,Reference Fitzgerald, Liu and Stern 63 consistent with earlier work in pediatric OCD patients.Reference Woolley, Heyman, Brammer, Frampton, McGuire and Rubia 64 Failure to appropriately recruit dlPFC during performance monitoring may reflect insufficient capacity to engage cognitive control, contributing to deficient capacity for adjusting repetitive anxious thoughts and behavior. Taken together, these findings raise the possibility that increased pMFC and reduced dlPFC recruitment by conflict and errors may generalize across OCD and non-OCD anxiety disorders. Since greater pMFC signaling in response to error- and conflict-detection recruits more dlPFC-based cognitive control,Reference Kerns, Cohen, MacDonald, Cho, Stenger and Carter 33 increased activation in both regions may support increased regulatory control over anxiety.

Excessive Affective Response and Insufficient Cognitive Control During Performance Monitoring in OCD and the Anxiety Disorders: An Integrated Model

At this stage of research, many questions remain about the cause of ERN hyperactivity in OCD and anxiety disorders, particularly in pediatric patients. The developmental trajectory of neurocircuits complicates the picture for performance monitoring. Given these considerations, we suggest it may be useful to consider that an imbalance between neural networks for affective evaluation and task execution occurs during error-processing in patients.

Given emerging evidence that a widely distributed network contributes to the ERN,Reference Edwards, Calhoun and Kiehl 22 , Reference Doñamayor, Heilbronner and Münte 26 , Reference Gehring, Liu, Orr and Carp 65 multiple subcomponent processes mediated by distinct network nodes may contribute to the ERN. Indeed, Edwards et al Reference Edwards, Calhoun and Kiehl 22 recently used joint independent component analysis of simultaneously collected ERN and fMRI to reveal two temporo-spatially distinct components contribute to the ERN: (1) an earlier component (48 msec) associated with fMRI activity in caudal ACC and lateral prefrontal cortex (lPFC) and (2) a later component (86 msec) associated with activity in the rostral ACC. The authors interpreted their results as evidence that the ERN reflects early engagement of cognitive processes in caudal ACC and lPFC (eg, mismatch detection, signaling for adaptive control) and later engagement of affective processes in rostral ACC (eg, affective valuation of error significance).

These separable substrates for cognitive and affective response to errors may show differential rates of development, such that links between neurocircuits for performance monitoring and anxiety could differ at different stages of development. Specifically, deficits of neural substrate for adaptive control (e.g., caudal ACC, lPFC) may couple with excessive reactivity in substrate for affective response (e.g., rostal ACC, vmPFC) to drive anxiety across development, while the specific nature of these abnormalities (too little adaptive control, too much affective response, or the combination) may vary with patient age.

Accordingly, several imaging studies of error processing in OCD show increased activity not in the dorsal or caudal ACC, but in the rostral-ventral extent of the medial prefrontal cortex, including the vmPFCReference Fitzgerald, Welsh and Gehring 49 , Reference Maltby, Tolin, Worhunsky, O’Keefe and Kiehl 50 , Reference Stern, Welsh and Fitzgerald 52 (however, see Ursu et al Reference Ursu, Stenger, Shear, Jones and Carter 48 and Woolley et al Reference Woolley, Heyman, Brammer, Frampton, McGuire and Rubia 64 ). In resting state studies, patients with OCD have shown hyperactivityReference Whiteside, Port and Abramowitz 66 and aberrant connectivity of the orbitofrontal region, including vmPFC.Reference Beucke, Sepulcre and Talukdar 67 In adult patients, we have found excessive activity in the anterior insula related to the negative valuation of an error, and this activity was associated with increased connectivity between the vmPFC and anterior insula.Reference Stern, Welsh and Fitzgerald 52 More ventral midline response to errors in the perigenual ACC and vmPFC could be a source of inappropriate intrusion of negative affect (ie, hypersensitive emotional response to errors) that requires enhancing cognitive control mechanisms (increasing pMFC, dlPFC) or restoring separation between circuits for affect and cognition during error processing (eg, reciprocal anterior insula-vmPFC interactions) to improve OCD. Interestingly, in pediatric OCD, error-related activation in the rostral ACC increases from childhood through adolescence,Reference Huyser, Veltman, Wolters, de Haan and Boer 54 suggesting that atypical engagement of this vmPFC sub-region may represent a developmentally sensitive mechanism of illness that emerges with age. Atypical interactions between anterior insula and vmPFC have not been demonstrated in pediatric patients, and additional research will be needed to determine whether failure to develop reciprocal interactions between these regions uniquely characterizes OCD in adults.

A consideration of a cognitive-affective imbalance in OCD and anxiety disorders has several implications for future research. For example, it is not clear if the negative affect associated with an error represents a more general signature of anxiety, or more specific affects, such as worry, apprehension,Reference Moser, Moran, Schroder, Donnellan and Yeung 5 or frustration.Reference Spunt, Lieberman, Cohen and Eisenberger 68 Additional research is needed to determine whether vmPFC hyperactivity may be the source of a pathological negative appraisal of error commission in OCD and non-OCD anxiety disorders. In addition, developmental neuroimaging work is needed to determine whether there are sensitive periods for performance monitoring abnormalities during which certain interventions are most likely to be successful.Reference Casey, Pattwell, Glatt and Lee 3 For instance, in healthy youth, pMFC-based networks for performance monitoring continue to develop through adolescence and into young adulthood,Reference Fair, Dosenbach and Church 46 , Reference Ferdinand and Kray 69 suggesting plasticity that may make performance enhancing strategies (eg, cognitive control training) particularly beneficial for adolescent patients. By contrast, in anxiety, atypical vmPFC-insula interactions during performance monitoring may emerge later in development, necessitating other strategies to reduce anxiety in older patients.

Conclusion

ERN and fMRI research consistently demonstrate hyperactivation to errors in midline prefrontal cortex in pediatric and adult patients with OCD and non-OCD anxiety disorders. These abnormalities have been variably localized, and we have suggested that more posterior activations may reflect a compensatory process by which increased signaling for cognitive control can reduce anxiety, while more ventral activations may represent the source of a pathological negative appraisal of error commission, triggering anxiety symptoms. We have also considered the maturation of neural substrate for cognitive control and affective/evaluative aspects of error-processing, suggesting that specific abnormalities of these functions may vary with illness severity and stage of development. For instance, impoverished recruitment of prefrontal control may set the stage for the emergence of anxiety, and may need to be specifically targeted in young patients to reduce symptoms. By contrast, adult patients may have missed the developmental window in which mechanisms for cognitive control are most amenable to modulation. Instead, in older patients, enhancing reciprocal connections between pMFC- and dlPFC-based networks for control and vmPFC-based affective valuation may need to be a focus of treatment. It is also important to understand whether or not the signals from ERP and fMRI studies represent compensations for or causes of anxiety, in order to design cognitive training or neuromodulatory therapies that would seek to increase (in the case of compensatory activity) or decrease (for targets causing anxiety) signaling. In conclusion, error-processing networks present potential targets for novel treatments, such as cognitive training or transcranial magnetic stimulation, to reduce and even prevent illness. However, developmentally sensitive alterations of error processing will need to be considered, since these networks may need to be targeted differently at different stages of development.

Disclosures

Kate Fitzgerald has the following disclosures: NIMH, independent investigator, research support. Stephan Taylor has the following disclosures: St. Jude Medical, independent investigator, research support; Neuronetics, independent investigator, research support; NIMH, independent investigator, research support.

References

1. Kessler, RC, Berglund, P, Demler, O, Jin, R, Merikangas, KR, Walters, EE. Lifetime prevalence and age-of-onset distributions of DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005; 62(6): 593–602.Google Scholar
2. Kessler, RC, Ormel, J, Petukhova, M, et al. Development of lifetime comorbidity in the World Health Organization world mental health surveys. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2011; 68(1): 90–100.Google Scholar
3. Casey, BJ, Pattwell, SS, Glatt, CE, Lee, FS. Treating the developing brain: implications from human imaging and mouse genetics. Annu Rev Med. 2013; 64: 427–439.Google Scholar
4. Olvet, DM, Hajcak, G. The error-related negativity (ERN) and psychopathology: toward an endophenotype. Clin Psychol Rev. 2008; 28(8): 1343–1354.Google Scholar
5. Moser, JS, Moran, TP, Schroder, HS, Donnellan, MB, Yeung, N. On the relationship between anxiety and error monitoring: a meta-analysis and conceptual framework. Front Hum Neurosci. 2013; 7: 466.Google Scholar
6. Pitman, RK. A cybernetic model of obsessive-compulsive psychopathology. Compr Psychiatry. 1987; 28(4): 334–343.Google Scholar
7. Gehring, WJ, Himle, J, Nisenson, LG. Action-monitoring dysfunction in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Psychol Sci. 2000; 11(1): 1–6.Google Scholar
8. Endrass, T, Ullsperger, M. Specificity of performance monitoring changes in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2014; 46(Pt 1): 124–138.Google Scholar
9. Hajcak, G, Franklin, ME, Foa, EB, Simons, RF. Increased error-related brain activity in pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder before and after treatment. Am J Psychiatry. 2008; 165(1): 116–123.Google Scholar
10. Hanna, GL, Carrasco, M, Harbin, SM, et al. Error-related negativity and tic history in pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2012; 51(9): 902–910.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. Carrasco, M, Hong, C, Nienhuis, JK, et al. Increased error-related brain activity in youth with obsessive-compulsive disorder and other anxiety disorders. Neurosci Lett. 2013; 541: 214–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12. Lahat, A, Lamm, C, Chronis-Tuscano, A, Pine, DS, Henderson, HA, Fox, NA. Early behavioral inhibition and increased error monitoring predict later social phobia symptoms in childhood. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2014; 53(4): 447–455.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. McDermott, JM, Perez-Edgar, K, Henderson, HA, Chronis-Tuscano, A, Pine, DS, Fox, NA. A history of childhood behavioral inhibition and enhanced response monitoring in adolescence are linked to clinical anxiety. Biol Psychiatry. 2009; 65(5): 445–448.Google Scholar
14. Foti, D, Kotov, R, Bromet, E, Hajcak, G. Beyond the broken error-related negativity: functional and diagnostic correlates of error processing in psychosis. Biol Psychiatry. 2012; 71(10): 864–872.Google Scholar
15. Geburek, AJ, Rist, F, Gediga, G, Stroux, D, Pedersen, A. Electrophysiological indices of error monitoring in juvenile and adult attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)—a meta-analytic appraisal. Int J Psychophysiol. 2013; 87(3): 349–362.Google Scholar
16. Proudfit, GH, Inzlicht, M, Mennin, DS. Anxiety and error monitoring: the importance of motivation and emotion. Front Hum Neurosci. 2013; 7: 636.Google Scholar
17. Bishop, SJ. Neurocognitive mechanisms of anxiety: an integrative account. Trends Cogn Sci. 2007; 11(7): 307–316.Google Scholar
18. Meyer, A, Weinberg, A, Klein, DN, Hajcak, G. The development of the error-related negativity (ERN) and its relationship with anxiety: evidence from 8 to 13 year-olds. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2012; 2(1): 152–161.Google Scholar
19. Ladouceur, CD, Dahl, RE, Birmaher, B, Axelson, DA, Ryan, ND. Increased error-related negativity (ERN) in childhood anxiety disorders: ERP and source localization. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2006; 47(10): 1073–1082.Google Scholar
20. Meyer, A, Hajcak, G, Torpey, DC, et al. Increased error-related brain activity in six-year-old children with clinical anxiety. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2013; 41(8): 1257–1266.Google Scholar
21. Muris, P, van der Pennen, E, Sigmond, R, Mayer, B. Symptoms of anxiety, depression, and aggression in non-clinical children: relationships with self-report and performance-based measures of attention and effortful control. Child Psychiatry Hum Dev. 2008; 39(4): 455–467.Google Scholar
22. Edwards, BG, Calhoun, VD, Kiehl, KA. Joint ICA of ERP and fMRI during error-monitoring. Neuroimage. 2012; 59(2): 1896–1903.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23. Mathalon, DH, Whitfield, SL, Ford, JM. Anatomy of an error: ERP and fMRI. Biol Psychology. 2003; 64(1): 119–141.Google Scholar
24. Debener, S, Ullsperger, M, Siegel, M, Fiehler, K, von Cramon, DY, Engel, AK. Trial-by-trial coupling of concurrent electroencephalogram and functional magnetic resonance imaging identifies the dynamics of performance monitoring. J Neurosci. 2005; 25(50): 11730–11737.Google Scholar
25. Agam, Y, Hämäläinen, MS, Lee, AK, et al. Multimodal neuroimaging dissociates hemodynamic and electrophysiological correlates of error processing. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011; 108(42): 17556–17561.Google Scholar
26. Doñamayor, N, Heilbronner, U, Münte, TF. Coupling electrophysiological and hemodynamic responses to errors. Hum Brain Mapp. 2012; 33(7): 1621–1633.Google Scholar
27. Ridderinkhof, KR, Ullsperger, M, Crone, EA, Nieuwenhuis, S. The role of the medial frontal cortex in cognitive control. Science. 2004; 306(5695): 443–447.Google Scholar
28. Sridharan, D, Levitin, DJ, Menon, V. A critical role for the right fronto-insular cortex in switching between central-executive and default-mode networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008; 105(34): 12569–12574.Google Scholar
29. Allman, JM, Hakeem, A, Erwin, JM, Nimchinsky, E, Hof, P. The anterior cingulate cortex: the evolution of an interface between emotion and cognition. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2001; 935: 107–117.Google Scholar
30. Critchley, HD. Neural mechanisms of autonomic, affective, and cognitive integration. J Comp Neurol. 2005; 493(1): 154–166.Google Scholar
31. Dolan, RJ. Emotion, cognition, and behavior. Science. 2002; 298(5596): 1191–1194.Google Scholar
32. Cavanaugh, JF, Shackman, AJ. Frontal midline theta reflects anxiety and cognitive control: meta-analytic evidence. J Physiol Paris. In press. DOI: 10.1016/j.jphysparis.2014.04.003.Google Scholar
33. Kerns, JG, Cohen, JD, MacDonald, AW 3rd, Cho, RY, Stenger, VA, Carter, CS. Anterior cingulate conflict monitoring and adjustments in control. Science. 2004; 303(5660): 1023–1026.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
34. Barbas, H. Connections underlying the synthesis of cognition, memory, and emotion in primate prefrontal cortices. Brain Res Bull. 2000; 52(5): 319–330.Google Scholar
35. Roy, M, Shohamy, D, Wager, TD. Ventromedial prefrontal-subcortical systems and the generation of affective meaning. Trends Cogn Sci. 2012; 16(3): 147–156.Google Scholar
36. Myers-Schulz, B, Koenigs, M. Functional anatomy of ventromedial prefrontal cortex: implications for mood and anxiety disorders. Mol Psychiatry. 2012; 17(2): 132–141.Google Scholar
37. Taylor, SF, Martis, B, Fitzgerald, KD, et al. Medial frontal cortex activity and loss-related responses to errors. J Neurosci. 2006; 26(15): 4063–4070.Google Scholar
38. Rubia, K, Smith, AB, Taylor, E, Brammer, M. Linear age-correlated functional development of right inferior fronto-striato-cerebellar networks during response inhibition and anterior cingulate during error-related processes. Hum Brain Mapp. 2007; 28(11): 1163–1177.Google Scholar
39. Velanova, K, Wheeler, ME, Luna, B. Maturational changes in anterior cingulate and frontoparietal recruitment support the development of error processing and inhibitory control. Cereb Cortex. 2008; 18(11): 2505–2522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
40. Fitzgerald, KD, Perkins, SC, Angstadt, M, et al. The development of performance-monitoring function in the posterior medial frontal cortex. Neuroimage. 2010; 49(4): 3463–3473.Google Scholar
41. Davies, PL, Segalowitz, SJ, Gavin, WJ. Development of response-monitoring ERPs in 7- to 25-year-olds. Dev Neuropsychol. 2004; 25(3): 355–376.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
42. Yeung, N, Cohen, JD, Botvinick, MM. The neural basis of error detection: conflict monitoring and the error-related negativity. Psychol Rev. 2004; 111(4): 931–959.Google Scholar
43. Carter, CS, Braver, TS, Barch, DM, Botvinick, MM, Noll, D, Cohen, JD. Anterior cingulate cortex, error detection, and the online monitoring of performance. Science. 1998; 280(5364): 747–749.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
44. Perkins, SC, Welsh, RC, Stern, ER, Taylor, SF, Fitzgerald, KD. Topographic analysis of the development of individual activation patterns during performance monitoring in medial frontal cortex. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2013; 6: 137–148.Google Scholar
45. Perlman, SB, Pelphrey, KA. Regulatory brain development: balancing emotion and cognition. Soc Neurosci. 2010; 5(5–6): 533–542.Google Scholar
46. Fair, DA, Dosenbach, NU, Church, JA, et al. Development of distinct control networks through segregation and integration. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007; 104(33): 13507–13512.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
47. Steinbeis, N, Haushofer, J, Fehr, E, Singer, T. Development of behavioral control and associated vmPFC-DLPFC connectivity explains children’s increased resistance to temptation in intertemporal choice. Cereb Cortex. In press. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhu167.Google Scholar
48. Ursu, S, Stenger, VA, Shear, MK, Jones, MR, Carter, CS. Overactive action monitoring in obsessive-compulsive disorder: evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging. Psychol Sci. 2003; 14(4): 347–353.Google Scholar
49. Fitzgerald, KD, Welsh, RC, Gehring, WJ, et al. Error-related hyperactivity of the anterior cingulate cortex in obsessive compulsive disorder. Biol Psychiatry. 2005; 57(3): 287–294.Google Scholar
50. Maltby, N, Tolin, DF, Worhunsky, P, O’Keefe, T M, Kiehl, KA. Dysfunctional action monitoring hyperactivates frontal-striatal circuits in obsessive-compulsive disorder: an event-related fMRI study. Neuroimage. 2005; 24(2): 495–503.Google Scholar
51. Yucel, M, Harrison, BJ, Wood, SJ, et al. Functional and biochemical alterations of the medial frontal cortex in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007; 64(8): 946–955.Google Scholar
52. Stern, ER, Welsh, RC, Fitzgerald, KD, et al. Hyperactive error responses and altered connectivity in ventromedial and frontoinsular cortices in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Biol Psychiatry. 2011; 69(6): 583–591.Google Scholar
53. Fitzgerald, KD, Stern, ER, Angstadt, M, et al. Altered function and connectivity of the medial frontal cortex in pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder. Biol Psychiatry. 2010; 68(11): 1039–1047.Google Scholar
54. Huyser, C, Veltman, DJ, Wolters, LH, de Haan, E, Boer, F. Developmental aspects of error and high-conflict-related brain activity in pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder: a fMRI study with a Flanker task before and after CBT. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2011; 52(12): 1251–1260.Google Scholar
55. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th ed., text rev. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.Google Scholar
56. Gilbert, P. The evolved basis and adaptive functions of cognitive distortions. Br J Med Psychol. 1998; 71(Pt 4): 447–463.Google Scholar
57. Szechtman, H, Woody, E. Obsessive-compulsive disorder as a disturbance of security motivation. Psychol Rev. 2004; 111(1): 111–127.Google Scholar
58. Schwartz, JM. A role for volition and attention in the generation of new brain circuitry: toward a neurobiology of mental force. Journal of Conciousness Studies. 1999; 6(8–9): 115–142.Google Scholar
59. van den Heuvel, OA, Veltman, DJ, Groenewegen, HJ, et al. Disorder-specific neuroanatomical correlates of attentional bias in obsessive-compulsive disorder, panic disorder, and hypochondriasis. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005; 62(8): 922–933.Google Scholar
60. Goldin, PR, Manber, T, Hakimi, S, Canli, T, Gross, JJ. Neural bases of social anxiety disorder: emotional reactivity and cognitive regulation during social and physical threat. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2009; 66(2): 170–180.Google Scholar
61. Moser, JS, Moran, TP, Jendrusina, AA. Parsing relationships between dimensions of anxiety and action monitoring brain potentials in female undergraduates. Psychophysiology. 2012; 49(1): 3–10.Google Scholar
62. Righi, S, Mecacci, L, Viggiano, MP. Anxiety, cognitive self-evaluation and performance: ERP correlates. J Anxiety Disord. 2009; 23(8): 1132–1138.Google Scholar
63. Fitzgerald, KD, Liu, Y, Stern, ER, et al. Reduced error-related activation of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex across pediatric anxiety disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2013; 52(11): 1183–1191.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
64. Woolley, J, Heyman, I, Brammer, M, Frampton, I, McGuire, PK, Rubia, K. Brain activation in paediatric obsessive compulsive disorder during tasks of inhibitory control. Br J Psychiatry. 2008; 192(1): 25–31.Google Scholar
65. Gehring, WJ, Liu, Y, Orr, JM, Carp, J. The error-related negativity (ERN/Ne). In: Luck SK, Kappenman E, eds. Oxford Handbook of Event-Related Potential Components. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012: 231–291.Google Scholar
66. Whiteside, SP, Port, JD, Abramowitz, JS. A meta-analysis of functional neuroimaging in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Psychiatry Res. 2004; 132(1): 69–79.Google Scholar
67. Beucke, JC, Sepulcre, J, Talukdar, T, et al. Abnormally high degree connectivity of the orbitofrontal cortex in obsessive-compulsive disorder. JAMA Psychiatry. 2013; 70(6): 619–629.Google Scholar
68. Spunt, RP, Lieberman, MD, Cohen, JR, Eisenberger, NI. The phenomenology of error processing: the dorsal ACC response to stop-signal errors tracks reports of negative affect. J Cogn Neurosci. 2012; 24(8): 1753–1765.Google Scholar
69. Ferdinand, NK, Kray, J. Developmental changes in performance monitoring: how electrophysiological data can enhance our understanding of error and feedback processing in childhood and adolescence. Behav Brain Res. 2014; 263: 122–132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
70. Santesso, DL, Segalowitz, SJ, Schmidt, LA. Error-related electrocortical responses are enhanced in children with obsessive-compulsive behaviors. Dev Neuropsychol. 2006; 29(3): 431–445.Google Scholar
71. Torpey, DC, Hajcak, G, Kim, J, Kujawa, AJ, Dyson, MW, Olino, TM, Klein, DN. Error-related brain activity in young children: associations with parental anxiety and child temperamental negative emotionality. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2013; 54(8): 854–862.Google Scholar
72. Bress, JN, Meyer, A, Hajcak, G. Differentiating anxiety and depression in children and adolescents: Evidence from event-related brain potentials. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2015; 44(2): 238–249.Google Scholar
73. Achenbach, TM. The Achenbach System of Empirically Based Assessemnt (ASEBA): Development, Findings, Theory, and Applications. Burlington, VT: University of Vermont Research Center for Children, Youth & Families, 2009.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1 Error-related negativity (ERN) and pediatric obsessive compulsive and anxiety disorders: a summary of the published literature

Figure 1

Table 2 fMRI studies of error-processing in pediatric obsessive compulsive and anxiety disorders: a summary of the published literature

Figure 2

Figure 1 Schematic illustration of performance monitoring and proposed disruptions in OCD. (A) In healthy subjects, components of the performance monitoring network include the pMFC working in concert with the anterior insula (aIns) to monitor behavior and detect mismatches (errors), and then send a signal to the dlPFC, which increases control to suppress unwanted interference and improve performance. The vmPFC, which typically deactivates during tasks that require an external focus of attention, also modulates activity in the pMFC and aIns, possibly to provide a signal that determines the value of a task and a subsequent error. (B) In OCD, evidence suggests that several of these components are disrupted (although results in children and adults differ slightly). Activity is increased in the monitoring nodes (pMFC and anterior insula, aIns), and the connection between the vmPFC and aIns is increased, which may signal the greater negative valuation that OCD patients place on errors. Other disrupted nodes may include the pMFC-dlPFC connection, and a weakened ability to overcome interfering activity from valuation centers that drive compulsive behaviors.