Top

Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Research

The contribution of theta and delta to feedback processing in children with developmental language disorder

Authors: Asiya Gul, Lauren S. Baron, Yael Arbel

Published in: Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders | Issue 1/2023

Abstract

Purpose

The study aimed at evaluating feedback processing at the electrophysiological level and its relation to learning in children with developmental language disorder (DLD) to further advance our understanding of the underlying neural mechanisms of feedback-based learning in children with this disorder.

Method

A feedback-based probabilistic learning task required children to classify novel cartoon animals into two categories that differ on five binary features, the probabilistic combination of which determined classification. The learning outcomes’ variance in relation to time- and time–frequency measures of feedback processing were examined and compared between 20 children with developmental language disorder and 25 age-matched children with typical language development.

Results

Children with developmental language disorder (DLD) performed poorer on the task when compared with their age-matched peers with typical language development (TD). The electrophysiological data in the time domain indicated no differences in the processing of positive and negative feedback among children with DLD. However, the time–frequency analysis revealed a strong theta activity in response to negative feedback in this group, suggesting an initial distinction between positive and negative feedback that was not captured by the ERP data. In the TD group, delta activity played a major role in shaping the FRN and P3a and was found to predict test performance. Delta did not contribute to the FRN and P3a in the DLD group. Additionally, theta and delta activities were not associated with the learning outcomes of children with DLD.

Conclusion

Theta activity, which is associated with the initial processing of feedback at the level of the anterior cingulate cortex, was detected in children with developmental language disorder (DLD) but was not associated with their learning outcomes. Delta activity, which is assumed to be generated by the striatum and to be linked to elaborate processing of outcomes and adjustment of future actions, contributed to processing and learning outcomes of children with typical language development but not of children with DLD. The results provide evidence for atypical striatum-based feedback processing in children with DLD.

Arbel Y, Donchin E. Error and performance feedback processing by children with specific language impairment-an ERP study. Biol Psychol. 2014;99(1):83–91.PubMedCrossRef

Arbel Y, Fitzpatrick I, He X. Learning with and without feedback in children with developmental language disorder. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2021;64(5):1696–711.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Arbel Y, Fox AB. Electrophysiological examination of feedback-based learning in 8–11-year-old children. Front Psychol. 2021;12:640270.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Arbel Y, McCarty KN, Goldman M, Donchin E, Brumback T. Developmental changes in the feedback related negativity from 8 to 14 years. Int J Psychophysiol. 2018;132(June 2017):331–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2018.01.004.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Arbel Y, Hong L, Baker TE, Holroyd CB. It’s all about timing: an electrophysiological examination of feedback-based learning with immediate and delayed feedback. Neuropsychologia. 2017;99:179–86.PubMedCrossRef

Arbel Y, Wu H. A neurophysiological examination of quality of learning in a feedback-based learning task. Neuropsychologia. 2016;93(Pt. A):13–20.PubMedCrossRef

Badcock NA, Bishop DVM, Hardiman MJ, Barry JG, Watkins KE. Colocalization of abnormal brain structure and function in specific language impairment. Brain Lang. 2012;120(3):310–20.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Başar-Eroglu C, Demiralp T, Schürmann M, Başar E. Topological distribution of oddball “P300” responses. Int J Psychophysiol. 2001;39(2–3):213–20.PubMedCrossRef

Batterink LJ, Paller KA, Reber PJ. Understanding the neural bases of implicit and statistical learning. Top Cogn Sci. 2019;11(3):482–503.PubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Becker MPI, Nitsch AM, Miltner WHR, Straube T. A single-trial estimation of the feedback-related negativity and its relation to BOLD responses in a time-estimation task. J Neurosci. 2014;34(8):3005–12.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

11.

Benton AL. Developmental aphasia and brain damage. Cortex. 1964;1(1):40–52.CrossRef

12.

Bernat EM, Nelson LD, Baskin-Sommers AR. Time-frequency theta and delta measures index separable components of feedback processing in a gambling task. Psychophysiology. 2015;52(5):626–37.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

13.

Bernat EM, Nelson LD, Steele VR, Gehring WJ, Patrick CJ. Externalizing psychopathology and gain–loss feedback in a simulated gambling task: dissociable components of brain response revealed by time-frequency analysis. J Abnorm Psychol. 2011;120(2):352–64.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

14.

Bernat EM, Williams WJ, Gehring WJ. Decomposing ERP time-frequency energy using PCA. Clin Neurophysiol. 2005;116(6):1314–34.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Bishop DV, Snowling MJ, Thompson PA, Greenhalgh T, CATALISE-2 Consortium. Phase 2 of CATALISE: a multinational and multidisciplinary Delphi consensus study of problems with language development: terminology. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2017;58(10):1068–80.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

16.

Boudewyn MA, Luck SJ, Farrens JL, Kappenman ES. How many trials does it take to get a significant ERP effect? It depends. Psychophysiology. 2018;55(6):e13049. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13049.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Bowers ME, Buzzell GA, Bernat EM, Fox NA, Barker TV. Time-frequency approaches to investigating changes in feedback processing during childhood and adolescence. Psychophysiology. 2018;55(10):1–13.CrossRef

18.

Carlson JM, Foti D, Mujica-Parodi LR, Harmon-Jones E, Hajcak G. Ventral striatal and medial prefrontal BOLD activation is correlated with reward-related electrocortical activity: a combined ERP and fMRI study. Neuroimage. 2011;57(4):1608–16.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Cavanagh JF, Zambrano-Vazquez L, Allen JJB. Theta lingua franca: a common mid-frontal substrate for action monitoring processes. Psychophysiology. 2012;49(2):220–38.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Cavanagh JF, Frank MJ. Frontal theta as a mechanism for cognitive control. Trends Cogn Sci. 2014;18(8):414–21.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

21.

Cincotta CM, Seger CA. Dissociation between Striatal Regions while learning to categorize via feedback and via observation. J Cogn Neurosci. 2007;19(2):249–65.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Clark MM, Plante E. Morphology of the inferior frontal gyrus in developmentally language-disordered adults. Brain Lang. 1998;61(2):288–303.PubMedCrossRef

23.

Cohen M, Campbell R, Yaghmai F. Neuropathological abnormalities in developmental dysphasia. Ann Neurol. 1989;25(6):567–70.PubMedCrossRef

24.

Cohen MX, Elger CE, Ranganath C. Reward expectation modulates feedback-related negativity and EEG spectra. Neuroimage. 2007;35(2):968–78.PubMedCrossRef

25.

Cohen MX, Wilmes K, van de Vijver I. Cortical electrophysiological network dynamics of feedback learning. Trends Cogn Sci. 2011;15(12):558–66.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Dale R, Christiansen M. Active and passive statistical learning: exploring the role of feedback in artificial grammar learning and language. In: Forbus K, Gentner D, Regier T, editors. Proceedings of the 26th annual meeting of the cognitive science society. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2004. p. 262–7.

27.

Delorme A, Makeig S. EEGLAB: an open-source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. J Neurosci Methods. 2004;134(1):9–21.PubMedCrossRef

28.

Denays R, Tondeur M, Foulon M, Verstraeten F, Ham H, Piepsz A, Noël P. Regional brain blood flow in congenital dysphasia: Studies with technetium-99m HM-PAO SPECT. J Nucl Med. 1989;30(11):1825–9.PubMed

29.

Dien J. Evaluating two-step PCA of ERP data with geomin, infomax, oblimin, promax, and varimax rotations. Psychophysiology. 2010;47(1):170–83.PubMedCrossRef

30.

Eppinger B, Mock B, Kray J. Developmental differences in learning and error processing: evidence from ERPs. Psychophysiology. 2009;46(5):1043–53.PubMedCrossRef

31.

Erickson LC, Thiessen ED. Statistical learning of language: theory, validity, and predictions of a statistical learning account of language acquisition. Dev Rev. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2015.05.002.CrossRef

32.

Ferdinand NK, Becker AMW, Kray J, Gehring WJ. Feedback processing in children and adolescents: Is there a sensitivity for processing rewarding feedback? Neuropsychologia. 2016;82:31–8.PubMedCrossRef

33.

Ferdinand NK, Opitz B. Different aspects of performance feedback engage different brain areas: disentangling valence and expectancy in feedback processing. Sci Rep. 2014;4(5986):1–8.

34.

Ferree TC, Luu P, Russell GS, Tucker DM. Scalp electrode impedance, infection risk, and EEG data quality. Clin Neurophysiol. 2001;112(3):536–44.PubMedCrossRef

35.

Foti D, Weinberg A, Bernat EM, Proudfit GH. Anterior cingulate activity to monetary loss and basal ganglia activity to monetary gain uniquely contribute to the feedback negativity. Clin Neurophysiol. 2015;126(7):1338–47.PubMedCrossRef

36.

Foti D, Weinberg A, Dien J, Hajcak G. EEG activity in the basal ganglia differentiates rewards from non-rewards: temporospatial principal components analysis and source localization of event-related potentials. Hum Brain Mapp. 2011;32(12):2207–16.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

37.

Gallagher TM, Watkin KL. 3D Ultrasonic fetal neuroimaging and familial language disorders: In utero brain development. J Neurolinguistics. 1997;10:187–201.CrossRef

38.

Gallinat E, Spaulding TJ. Differences in the performance of children with specific language impairment and their typically developing peers on nonverbal cognitive tests: a meta-analysis. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2014;57(4):1363–82.PubMedCrossRef

39.

Galvan. Adolescent development of the reward system. Front Hum Neurosci. 2010. https://doi.org/10.3389/neuro.09.006.200.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Garraffa M, Coco MI, Branigan HP. Impaired implicit learning of syntactic structure in children with developmental language disorder: evidence from syntactic priming. Autism Dev Lang Impair. 2018;3. https://doi.org/10.1177/2396941518779939.

41.

Gauger LM, Lombardino LJ, Leonard CM. Brain morphology in children with specific language impairment. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1997;40:1272–84.PubMedCrossRef

42.

Gehring WJ, Willoughby AR. The medial frontal cortex and the rapid processing of monetary gains and losses. Science. 2002;295(5563):2279–82.PubMedCrossRef

43.

Gul A, Baron L, Arbel Y. Feedback processing during probabilistic learning in children with developmental language disorder: an ERP study. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2022;65(6):2272–87. https://doi.org/10.1044/2022_JSLHR-21-00612.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

44.

Harper J, Malone SM, Bernat EM. Theta and delta band activity explain N2 and P3 ERP component activity in a go/no-go task. Clin Neurophysiol. 2014;125(1):124–32.PubMedCrossRef

45.

Hauser TU, Iannaccone R, Stämpfli P, Drechsler R, Brandeis D, Walitza S, Brem S. The feedback-related negativity (FRN) revisited: new insights into the localization, meaning and network organization. Neuroimage. 2014;84:159–68.PubMedCrossRef

46.

Holroyd CB, Coles MG. The neural basis of human error processing: reinforcement learning, dopamine, and the error-related negativity. Psychol Rev. 2002;109(4):679.PubMedCrossRef

47.

Holroyd CB, Pakzad-Vaezi KL, Krigolson OE. The feedback correct-related positivity: sensitivity of the event-related brain potential to unexpected positive feedback. Psychophysiology. 2008;45(5):688–97.PubMedCrossRef

48.

Holroyd CB, Umemoto A. The research domain criteria framework: the case for anterior cingulate cortex. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2016;71:418–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.09.021.CrossRefPubMed

49.

Hsu HJ, Bishop DVM. Sequence-specific procedural learning deficits in children with specific language impairment. Dev Sci. 2014;17(3):352–65.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

50.

Jernigan TL, Hesselink JR, Sowell E, Tallal PA. Cerebral structure on magnetic resonance imaging in language and learning-impaired children. Arch Neurol. 1991;48(5):539–45.PubMedCrossRef

51.

Kabani NJ, Macdonald D, Evans A, Gopnik M. Neuroanatomical correlates of familial language impairment: a preliminary report. J Neurolinguistics. 1997;10(2–3):203–14.CrossRef

52.

Kaufman AS, Kaufman NL. Kaufman brief intelligence test. 2nd ed. Bloomington: Pearson, Inc.; 2004.

53.

Kemény F, Lukács A. Impaired procedural learning in language impairment: results from probabilistic categorization. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2010;32(3):249–58.PubMedCrossRef

54.

Kim S, Arbel Y. Immediate and delayed auditory feedback in declarative learning: an examination of the feedback related event related potentials. Neuropsychologia. 2019;129:255–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2019.04.001.CrossRefPubMed

55.

Krishnan S, Cler GJ, Smith HJ, Willis HE, Asaridou SS, Healy MP, Papp D, Watkins KE. Quantitative MRI reveals differences in striatal myelin in children with DLD. Elife. 2022;11:e74242. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.74242.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

56.

Krishnan S, Watkins KE, Bishop DVM. Neurobiological basis of language learning difficulties. Trends Cogn Sci. 2016;20(9):701–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.06.012.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

57.

Lee JC. Insensitivity to response-contingent feedback in adolescents with developmental language disorder (DLD). Brain Lang. 2017;174:112–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

58.

Lee JC, Nopoulos PC, Tomblin JB. Abnormal subcortical components of the corticostriatal system in young adults with DLI: a combined structural MRI and DTI study. Neuropsychologia. 2013;51(11):2154–61.PubMedCrossRef

59.

Lee JC, Tomblin JB. Reinforcement learning in young adults with developmental language impairment. Brain Lang. 2012;123(3):154–63.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

60.

Liegeois F, Connelly A, Baldeweg T, Gadian DG, Varghakhadem F. Functional abnormalities as- sociated with the FOXP2 gene mutation in the KE family: a covert language fMRI study. In: Neuro- image Human Brain Mapping 2002 Meeting, Sendai, Japan. 2002.

61.

Luft CD, Nolte G, Bhattacharya J. High-learners present larger mid-frontal theta power and connectivity in response to incorrect performance feedback. J Neurosci. 2013;33(5):2029–38. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2565-12.2013.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

62.

Miltner WH, Braun CH, Coles MG. Event-related brain potentials following incorrect feedback in a time-estimation task: evidence for a “generic” neural system for error detection. J Cogn Neurosci. 1997;9(6):788–98.PubMedCrossRef

63.

Nelson NW, Plante E, Helm-Estabrooks N, Hotz G. Test of Integrated Language and Literacy Skills (TILLS). Baltimore: Brookes; 2016.

64.

Obeid R, Brooks PJ, Powers KL, Gillespie-Lynch K, Lum JAG. Statistical learning in specific language impairment and autism spectrum disorder: a meta-analysis. Front Psychol. 2016;7:1245. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01245.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

65.

Olvet DM, Hajcak G. The stability of error-related brain activity with increasing trials. Psychophysiology. 2009;46(5):957–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2009.00848.x.CrossRefPubMed

66.

Palmer JA, Kreutz-Delgado K, Makeig S. AMICA: An adaptive mixture of independent component analyzers with shared components. In: Swartz Center for Computational Neuroscience, University of California San Diego, Tech. Rep. 2012.

67.

Peters S, Braams BR, Raijmakers MEJ, Koolschijn PCMP, Crone EA. The neural coding of feedback learning across child and adolescent development. J Cogn Neurosci. 2014;26(8):1705–20.PubMedCrossRef

68.

Peters S, Van Duijvenvoorde ACK, Koolschijn PCMP, Crone EA. Longitudinal development of frontoparietal activity during feedback learning: contributions of age, performance, working memory and cortical thickness. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2016;19:211–22.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

69.

Poldrack RA, Clark J, Pare-Blagoev EJ, Shohamy D, Moyano JC, Myers C, et al. Interactive memory systems in the human brain. Nature. 2001;414(6863):546–50.PubMedCrossRef

70.

Poldrack RA, Prabhakaran V, Seger CA, Gabrieli JD. Striatal activation during acquisition of a cognitive skill. Neuropsychology. 1999;13(4):564.PubMedCrossRef

71.

Proudfit GH. The reward positivity: from basic research on reward to a biomarker for depression. Psychophysiology. 2015;52(4):449–59.PubMedCrossRef

72.

Saffran JR, Wilson DP. From syllables to syntax: multilevel statistical learning by 12-month-old infants. Infancy. 2003;4(2):273–84.CrossRef

73.

Saxton M. Negative evidence and negative feedback: immediate effects on the grammaticality of child speech. First Lang. 2000;20:221.CrossRef

74.

Schultz W. Getting formal with dopamine and reward. Neuron. 2002;36:241–63.PubMedCrossRef

75.

Shohamy D, Myers CE, Grossman S, Sage J, Gluck MA, Poldrack RA. Cortico-striatal contributions to feedback-based learning: converging data from neuroimaging and neuropsychology. Brain. 2004;127:851–9.PubMedCrossRef

76.

Smith DG, Xiao L, Bechara A. Decision making in children and adolescents: impaired iowa gambling task performance in early adolescence. Dev Psychol. 2012;48(4):1180–7. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026342.CrossRefPubMed

77.

Soriano-Mas C, Pujol J, Ortiz H, Deus J, López-Sala A, Sans A. Age-related brain structural alterations in children with specific language impairment. Hum Brain Mapp. 2009;30(5):1626–36.PubMedCrossRef

78.

Steinberg L. A social neuroscience perspective on adolescent risk-taking. Dev Rev. 2008;28(1):78–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2007.08.002.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

79.

Tallal P, Jernigan TL, Trauner D. Developmental bilateral damage to the head of the caudate nuclei: implications for speech-language pathology. J Med Speech Lang Pathol. 1994;2:23–8.

80.

Thompson SP, Newport EL. Statistical learning of syntax: the role of transitional probability. Lang Learn Dev. 2007;3(1):1–42.CrossRef

81.

Tomasello M. First steps toward a usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cogn Linguist. 2000;11(1/2):61–82.

82.

Tomblin JB, Mainela-Arnold E, Zhang X. Procedural learning in adolescents with and without specific language impairment. Lang Learn Dev. 2007;3:269–93.CrossRef

83.

Tricomi E, Delgado MR, McCandliss BD, McClelland JL, Fiez JA. Performance feedback drives caudate activation in a phonological learning task. J Cogn Neurosci. 2006;18(6):1029–43.PubMedCrossRef

84.

Ullman M, Pierpont E. Specific language impairment is not specific to language: the procedural deficit hypothesis. Cortex. 2005;41:399–433.PubMedCrossRef

85.

Ullman MT, Pullman MY. A compensatory role for declarative memory in neurodevelopmental disorders. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2015;51:205–22.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

86.

van de Vijver I, Richard Ridderinkhof K, Cohen MX. Frontal oscillatory dynamics predict feedback learning and action adjustment. J Cogn Neurosci. 2011;23(12):4106–21.PubMedCrossRef

87.

Vargha-Khadem F, Watkins KE, Price CJ, Ashburner J, Alcock KJ, Connelly A, Frackowiak RS, Friston KJ, Pembrey ME, Mishkin M, Gadian DG, Passingham RE. Neural basis of an inherited speech and language disorder. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1998;95(21):12695–700.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

88.

Watkins KE, Gadian DG, Vargha-Khadem F. Functional and structural brain abnormalities associated with a genetic disorder of speech and language. Am J Hum Genet. 1999;65(5):1215–21.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

89.

Watts ATM, Bachman MD, Bernat EM. Expectancy effects in feedback processing are explained primarily by time-frequency delta not theta. Biol Psychol. 2017;129(1):242–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2017.08.054.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

90.

Watts ATM, Bernat EM. Effects of reward context on feedback processing as indexed by time-frequency analysis. Psychophysiology. 2018;55(9):e13195.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

91.

West R, Huet A. The effect of aging on the ERP correlates of feedback processing in the probabilistic selection task. Brain Sci. 2020;10(1):1–14.CrossRef

92.

Wiig EH, Semel E, Secord WA. Clinical evaluation of language fundamentals. 5th ed. Bloomington: Pearson, Inc.; 2013.

93.

Wilkinson L, Tai YF, Lin CS, Lagnado DA, Brooks DJ, Piccini P, Jahanshahi M. Probabilistic classification learning with corrective feedback is associated with in vivo striatal dopamine release in the ventral striatum, while learning without feedback is not. Hum Brain Mapp. 2014;35(10):5106–15.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

94.

Winkler I, Debener S, Muller KR, Tangermann M. On the influence of high-pass filtering on ICA-based artifact reduction in EEG-ERP. In: Proceedings of the Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, EMBS. 2015. p. 4101–5.

95.

Zeithamova D, Maddox WT, Schnyer DM. Dissociable prototype learning systems: evidence from brain imaging and behavior. J Neurosci. 2008;28(49):13194–201.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

96.

Zwart FS, Vissers C, Kessels R, Maes J. Implicit learning seems to come naturally for children with autism, but not for children with specific language impairment: evidence from behavioral and ERP data. Autism Res. 2018;11(7):1050–61.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

Title: The contribution of theta and delta to feedback processing in children with developmental language disorder
Authors: Asiya Gul
Lauren S. Baron
Yael Arbel
Publication date: 01-12-2023
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders / Issue 1/2023
Print ISSN: 1866-1947
Electronic ISSN: 1866-1955
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s11689-023-09481-1

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

The contribution of theta and delta to feedback processing in children with developmental language disorder

Abstract

Purpose

Method

Results

Conclusion

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Method

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

Role of the endocannabinoid system in fragile X syndrome: potential mechanisms for benefit from cannabidiol treatment

International consensus recommendations for the identification and treatment of tuberous sclerosis complex-associated neuropsychiatric disorders (TAND)

Comparing ability and norm-referenced scores as clinical trial outcomes for neurodevelopmental disabilities: a simulation study

Rare recurrent copy number variations in metabotropic glutamate receptor interacting genes in children with neurodevelopmental disorders

Comparison of evoked potentials across four related developmental encephalopathies

Deep phenotypic analysis of psychiatric features in genetically defined cohorts: application to XYY syndrome