Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33497918›Full record

ArticleCognition2021

The effect of uncertainty on prediction error in the action perception loop.

Kelsey Perrykkad, Rebecca P Lawson, Sharna Jamadar, Jakob Hohwy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The Many Roles of Precision in Action.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  7. Are youPersonality neuroscience · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
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

4 authors.

Kelsey PerrykkadCognition and Philosophy Lab, Philosophy Department, School of Philosophy, Historical and International Studies, Monash University, Clayton, Australia. Electronic address: kelsey.perrykkad@monash.edu.
Rebecca P LawsonDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Sharna JamadarTurner Institute for Brain and Mental Health, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.
Jakob HohwyCognition and Philosophy Lab, Philosophy Department, School of Philosophy, Historical and International Studies, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Among all their sensations, agents need to distinguish between those caused by themselves and those caused by external causes. The ability to infer agency is particularly challenging under conditions of uncertainty. Within the predictive processing framework, this should happen through active control of prediction error that closes the action-perception loop. Here we use a novel, temporally-sensitive, behavioural proxy for prediction error to show that it is minimised most quickly when volatility is high and when participants report agency, regardless of the accuracy of the judgement. We demonstrate broad effects of uncertainty on accuracy of agency judgements, movement, policy selection, and hypothesis switching. Measuring autism traits, we find differences in policy selection, sensitivity to uncertainty and hypothesis switching despite no difference in overall accuracy.

Indexed as

JudgmentSensationHumansMovementPerceptionUncertaintyAction-perception loopAgencyAutism traitsPrediction errorUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID33497918
PMCPMC8085733

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.