ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2021
Standard Tone Stability as a Manipulation of Precision in the Oddball Paradigm: Modulation of Prediction Error Responses to Fixed-Probability Deviants.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- How Precise Is Predictive Coding for Things We Hear? Mismatch Negativity With Shepard Tones.The European journal of neuroscience · 2026Article
- The Interplay of Bottom-Up Arousal and Attentional Capture during Auditory Scene Analysis: Evidence from Ocular Dynamics.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026Article
- Neuronal mismatch responses to auditory stimuli in the dorsal hippocampus of anesthetized rats.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Active Inference in Music Perception: Motor Engagement to Syncopation Modulates Rhythmic Prediction Error.Psychophysiology · 2025Article
- What Do Mismatch Negativity (MMN) Responses Tell Us About Tinnitus?Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2025Review
- Dynamics of Oddball Sound Processing: Trial-by-Trial Modeling of ECoG Signals.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Electrophysiological sensory deviance detection signals, such as the mismatch negativity (MMN), have been interpreted from the predictive coding framework as manifestations of prediction error (PE). From a frequentist perspective of the classic oddball paradigm, deviant stimuli are unexpected because of their low probability. However, the amount of PE elicited by a stimulus can be dissociated from its probability of occurrence: when the observer cannot make confident predictions, any event holds little surprise value, no matter how improbable. Here we tested the hypothesis that the magnitude of the neural response elicited to an improbable sound (D) would scale with the precision of the prediction derived from the repetition of another sound (S), by manipulating repetition stability. We recorded the Electroencephalogram (EEG) from 20 participants while passively listening to 4 types of isochronous pure tone sequences differing in the probability of the S tone (880 Hz) while holding constant the probability of the D tone [1,046 Hz; p(D) = 1/11]: Oddball [p(S) = 10/11]; High confidence (7/11); Low confidence (4/11); and Random (1/11). Tones of 9 different frequencies were equiprobably presented as fillers [p(S) + p(D) + p(F) = 1]. Using a mass-univariate non-parametric, cluster-based correlation analysis controlling for multiple comparisons, we found that the amplitude of the deviant-elicited ERP became more negative with increasing S probability, in a time-electrode window consistent with the MMN (ca. 120-200 ms; frontal), suggesting that the strength of a PE elicited to an improbable event indeed increases with the precision of the predictive model.
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.