Table_1.PDF

<p>The ability to learn from feedback is important for children’s adaptive behavior and school learning. Feedback has two main components, informative value and valence. How to disentangle these two components and what is the developmental neural correlates of using the informative value of feedback is still an open question. In this study, 23 children (7–10 years old) and 19 adults (19–22 years old) were asked to perform a rule induction task, in which they were required to find a rule, based on the informative value of feedback. Behavioral results indicated that the likelihood of correct searching behavior under negative feedback was low for children. Event-related potentials showed that (1) the effect of valence was processed in a wide time window, particularly in the N2 component; (2) the encoding process of the informative value of negative feedback began later for children than for adults; (3) a clear P300 was observed for adults; for children, however, P300 was absent in the frontal region; and (4) children processed the informative value of feedback chiefly in the left sites during the P300 time window, whereas adults did not show this laterality. These results suggested that children were less sensitive to the informative value of negative feedback possibly because of the immature brain.</p

Brain activation on 2-NF vs 1-NF and conjunction analysis.

<p>A is the areas where were more active in the 2-NF condition than in the 1-NF condition. B is the active areas of conjunction analysis (2-NF vs. 0-NF ∩ 1-NF vs. 0-NF)<b>.</b></p

Three conditions and the experimental procedure of a trial.

<p>First, participants viewed a fixation cross, followed by a stimulus display. The stimulus required a left index, left middle finger, or right index finger response within the time (6000ms) that the stimulus was displayed. The stimulus display was followed by the feedback for 1000 ms. A pseudorandom jitter of 2000 ms, 4000 ms, or 6000 ms was added at the end of a trial.</p

Regions more active for 2-NF condition than 1-NF condition.

<p>L, left; R, right; BA: Brodmann’s areas; x, y, z, coordinates of the centroid of the region in MNI coordinates.</p><p>**<i>p <</i> 0.001, uncorrected</p><p>Regions more active for 2-NF condition than 1-NF condition.</p

ROIs and the results.

<p>Percent signal change for each condition was selected from the ROIs. Error bars reflect standard deviation of the mean.</p

Regions more active for 2-NF vs 0-NF ∩ 1-NF vs 0-NF.

<p>L, left; R, right; BA: Brodmann’s areas; x, y, z, coordinates of the centroid of the region in MNI coordinates.</p><p>**<i>p <</i>0.001, uncorrected</p><p>Regions more active for 2-NF vs 0-NF ∩ 1-NF vs 0-NF.</p