ArticleeNeuro
Postdiction: When Temporal Regularity Drives Space Perception through Prestimulus Alpha Oscillations.
Article in eNeuro. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Causal inference shapes crossmodal postdiction in multisensory integration.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Time-dependent deployment of medial prefrontal cortical representations in male mice.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Individual alpha frequency tACS modifies the detection of space-time optical illusion.Experimental brain research · 2025Article
- Traveling waves in the human visual cortex: An MEG-EEG model-based approach.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Spontaneous slow cortical potentials and brain oscillations independently influence conscious visual perception.PLoS biology · 2025Article
- Spontaneous α Brain Dynamics Track the Episodic "When".The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023Article
- Postdiction in Visual Awareness and Intrinsic Religiosity.Cognitive science · 2022Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In postdiction, the last stimulus of a sequence changes the perception of the preceding stimuli. Postdiction has been reported in all sensory modalities, but its neural underpinnings remain poorly understood. In the rabbit illusion, a sequence of nonequidistant stimuli presented isochronously is perceived as equidistantly spaced. This illusion might be driven by an internal prior favoring a constant-speed motion. Here, we hypothesized that prestimulus alpha oscillations (8-12 Hz), known to correlate with perceptual expectations and biases, would reflect the degree to which perceptual reports are influenced by a constant-speed prior. Human participants were presented with ambiguous visual sequences while being recorded simultaneously with MEG and EEG: the same sequences yielded an illusory perception in about half the trials, allowing contrasting brain responses elicited by identical sequences causing distinct percepts. As a proxy of an individual's prior, we used the percentage of perceived illusion and the detection criterion, assuming that a strong constant-speed prior would result in a higher rate of illusory percepts. We found that high frontoparietal alpha power was associated with perceiving the sequence according to the individual's prior: participants with high susceptibility to the illusion would report the illusion, while participants with low susceptibility would report the veridical sequence. Additionally, we found that prestimulus alpha phase in occipitoparietal regions dissociated illusion from no-illusion trials. We interpret our results as suggesting that alpha power reflects an individual's constant-speed prior, whereas alpha phase modulates sensory uncertainty.
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.