Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36248631›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2022

Intention-based predictive information modulates auditory deviance processing.

Andreas Widmann, Erich Schröger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

2 authors.

Andreas WidmannWilhelm Wundt Institute for Psychology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany.
Erich SchrögerWilhelm Wundt Institute for Psychology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The human brain is highly responsive to (deviant) sounds violating an auditory regularity. Respective brain responses are usually investigated in situations when the sounds were produced by the experimenter. Acknowledging that humans also actively produce sounds, the present event-related potential study tested for differences in the brain responses to deviants that were produced by the listeners by pressing one of two buttons. In one condition, deviants were unpredictable with respect to the button-sound association. In another condition, deviants were predictable with high validity yielding correctly predicted deviants and incorrectly predicted (mispredicted) deviants. Temporal principal component analysis revealed deviant-specific N1 enhancement, mismatch negativity (MMN) and P3a. N1 enhancements were highly similar for each deviant type, indicating that the underlying neural mechanism is not affected by intention-based expectation about the self-produced forthcoming sound. The MMN was abolished for predictable deviants, suggesting that the intention-based prediction for a deviant can overwrite the prediction derived from the auditory regularity (predicting a standard). The P3a was present for each deviant type but was largest for mispredicted deviants. It is argued that the processes underlying P3a not only evaluate the deviant with respect to the fact that it violates an auditory regularity but also with respect to the intended sensorial effect of an action. Overall, our results specify current theories of auditory predictive processing, as they reveal that intention-based predictions exert different effects on different deviance-specific brain responses.

Indexed as

actionauditionintentionmismatch negativity (MMN)perceptionpredictionpredictive coding

Identifiers

PMID36248631
PMCPMC9554204

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.