Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23744445›Full record

ReviewCognitive processing2013

Active inference, sensory attenuation and illusions.

Harriet Brown, Rick A Adams, Isabel Parees, Mark Edwards, Karl Friston

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cognitive processing, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07290920 (Sensorimotor Integration in Patients With Tourette Syndrome), which is not on this map. Cited by 195 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
195citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
11.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT07290920 completednot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Sensorimotor Integration in Patients With Tourette Syndrome: an Observational Study.

TypeobservationalSponsorI.R.C.C.S Ospedale Galeazzi-Sant'AmbrogioRan2025 to 2025Enrolled60ConditionsTourette Disorder, Sensory Gating
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

195 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 513 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Active inference and speech motor control.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Born to act: Deferred action and desire as active inference.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. The myth of the Bayesian brain.European journal of applied physiology · 2025
    Review

135 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Harriet BrownInstitute of Neurology, The Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, UCL, 12 Queen Square, London, WC1N 3BG, UK, harriet.brown.09@ucl.ac.uk.
Rick A Adams
Isabel Parees
Mark Edwards
Karl Friston
University College London · GBWellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging · GBSobell House · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust 088130Wellcome Trust 091593
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Active inference provides a simple and neurobiologically plausible account of how action and perception are coupled in producing (Bayes) optimal behaviour. This can be seen most easily as minimising prediction error: we can either change our predictions to explain sensory input through perception. Alternatively, we can actively change sensory input to fulfil our predictions. In active inference, this action is mediated by classical reflex arcs that minimise proprioceptive prediction error created by descending proprioceptive predictions. However, this creates a conflict between action and perception; in that, self-generated movements require predictions to override the sensory evidence that one is not actually moving. However, ignoring sensory evidence means that externally generated sensations will not be perceived. Conversely, attending to (proprioceptive and somatosensory) sensations enables the detection of externally generated events but precludes generation of actions. This conflict can be resolved by attenuating the precision of sensory evidence during movement or, equivalently, attending away from the consequences of self-made acts. We propose that this Bayes optimal withdrawal of precise sensory evidence during movement is the cause of psychophysical sensory attenuation. Furthermore, it explains the force-matching illusion and reproduces empirical results almost exactly. Finally, if attenuation is removed, the force-matching illusion disappears and false (delusional) inferences about agency emerge. This is important, given the negative correlation between sensory attenuation and delusional beliefs in normal subjects--and the reduction in the magnitude of the illusion in schizophrenia. Active inference therefore links the neuromodulatory optimisation of precision to sensory attenuation and illusory phenomena during the attribution of agency in normal subjects. It also provides a functional account of deficits in syndromes characterised by false inference and impaired movement--like schizophrenia and Parkinsonism--syndromes that implicate abnormal modulatory neurotransmission.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsAttentionBayes TheoremBehaviorHumansIllusionsPsychophysicsSensation

Identifiers

PMID23744445
PMCPMC3824582
OpenAlexW2151496011

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.