ArticleScientific reports2021
The encoding of stochastic regularities is facilitated by action-effect predictions.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Impact of Action Intention Versus Action-Effect Intention on Auditory Prediction Error Signals.The European journal of neuroscience · 2026Article
- Investigation of sensory attenuation in the somatosensory domain using EEG in a novel virtual reality paradigm.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Markov chains as a proxy for the predictive memory representations underlying mismatch negativity.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Article
- The auditory brain in action: Intention determines predictive processing in the auditory system-A review of current paradigms and findings.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our brains continuously build and update predictive models of the world, sources of prediction being drawn for example from sensory regularities and/or our own actions. Yet, recent results in the auditory system indicate that stochastic regularities may not be easily encoded when a rare medium pitch deviant is presented between frequent high and low pitch standard sounds in random order, as reflected in the lack of sensory prediction error event-related potentials [i.e., mismatch negativity (MMN)]. We wanted to test the implication of the predictive coding theory that predictions based on higher-order generative models-here, based on action intention, are fed top-down in the hierarchy to sensory levels. Participants produced random sequences of high and low pitch sounds by button presses in two conditions: In a "specific" condition, one button produced high and the other low pitch sounds; in an "unspecific" condition, both buttons randomly produced high or low-pitch sounds. Rare medium pitch deviants elicited larger MMN and N2 responses in the "specific" compared to the "unspecific" condition, despite equal sound probabilities. These results thus demonstrate that action-effect predictions can boost stochastic regularity-based predictions and engage higher-order deviance detection processes, extending previous notions on the role of action predictions at sensory levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.