Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28119508›Full record

ArticleSocial cognitive and affective neuroscience2017

Hierarchical prediction errors in midbrain and septum during social learning.

Andreea O Diaconescu, Christoph Mathys, Lilian A E Weber, Lars Kasper, Jan Mauer, Klaas E Stephan

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social cognitive and affective neuroscience, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
69citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

69 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 146 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. The role of affective states in computational psychiatry.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2025
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

9 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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Andreea O DiaconescuTranslational Neuromodeling Unit, Institute for Biomedical Engineering, University of Zurich & ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Christoph MathysTranslational Neuromodeling Unit, Institute for Biomedical Engineering, University of Zurich & ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Lilian A E WeberTranslational Neuromodeling Unit, Institute for Biomedical Engineering, University of Zurich & ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Lars KasperTranslational Neuromodeling Unit, Institute for Biomedical Engineering, University of Zurich & ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Jan MauerMax Planck Institute for Metabolism Research, Cologne, Germany.
Klaas E StephanTranslational Neuromodeling Unit, Institute for Biomedical Engineering, University of Zurich & ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
University of Zurich · CHETH Zurich · CHMax Planck Institute for Metabolism Research · DEProstate Cancer Research · GBUniversity College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Social learning is fundamental to human interactions, yet its computational and physiological mechanisms are not well understood. One prominent open question concerns the role of neuromodulatory transmitters. We combined fMRI, computational modelling and genetics to address this question in two separate samples (N = 35, N = 47). Participants played a game requiring inference on an adviser's intentions whose motivation to help or mislead changed over time. Our analyses suggest that hierarchically structured belief updates about current advice validity and the adviser's trustworthiness, respectively, depend on different neuromodulatory systems. Low-level prediction errors (PEs) about advice accuracy not only activated regions known to support 'theory of mind', but also the dopaminergic midbrain. Furthermore, PE responses in ventral striatum were influenced by the Met/Val polymorphism of the Catechol-O-Methyltransferase (COMT) gene. By contrast, high-level PEs ('expected uncertainty') about the adviser's fidelity activated the cholinergic septum. These findings, replicated in both samples, have important implications: They suggest that social learning rests on hierarchically related PEs encoded by midbrain and septum activity, respectively, in the same manner as other forms of learning under volatility. Furthermore, these hierarchical PEs may be broadcast by dopaminergic and cholinergic projections to induce plasticity specifically in cortical areas known to represent beliefs about others.

Indexed as

AdultBrain MappingCatechol O-MethyltransferaseCultureDopamineHumansIntentionMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMesencephalonMotivationPolymorphism, Single NucleotideSeptum PellucidumSocial LearningTyrosine 3-MonooxygenaseYoung AdultCatechol O-MethyltransferaseDopamineTyrosine 3-MonooxygenaseBayesian inferenceCOMTdopaminefMRIhierarchical prediction errorstheory of mind

Identifiers

PMID28119508
PMCPMC5390746
OpenAlexW2581941658

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.