ReviewPerspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science2023
Beyond Infant's Looking: The Neural Basis for Infant Prediction Errors.
Review in Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Eyes on Development: Exploring the Impact of Early Life Nutrition Exposures on Child Cognition Through Eye-Tracking Assessment.Nutrition reviews · 2026Article
- Mapping EEG Metrics to Human Affective and Cognitive Models: An Interdisciplinary Scoping Review from a Cognitive Neuroscience Perspective.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Maternal anxiety shapes prediction error responses in the infant brain.Neurophotonics · 2025Article
- Maternal Interaction Relates to Neural Processing of Self-Related Multisensory Information in 5-Month-Olds.Developmental science · 2025Article
- Theta activity and cognitive functioning: Integrating evidence from resting-state and task-related developmental electroencephalography (EEG) research.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2024Review
- Mother-infant self- and interactive contingency at four months and infant cognition at one year: A view from microanalysis.Infant behavior & development · 2024Article
- Predictions about reward outcomes in rhesus monkeys.Behavioral neuroscience · 2024Article
- Holistic and Analytic Attention in Infancy: A Cross-Cultural Study in Sweden and Zimbabwe.Infancy : the official journal of the International Society on Infant StudiesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Contemporary conceptualizations on infant cognitive development focus on predictive processes; the basic idea is that the brain continuously creates predictions about what is expected and that the divergence between predicted and actual perceived data yields a prediction error. This prediction error updates the model from which the predictions are generated and therefore is a basic mechanism for learning and adaptation to the dynamics of the ever-changing environment. In this article, we review the types of available empirical evidence supporting the idea that predictive processes can be found in infancy, especially emphasizing the contribution of electrophysiology as a potential method for testing the similarity of the brain mechanisms for processing prediction errors in infants to those of adults. In infants, as with older children, adolescents, and adults, predictions involve synchronization bursts of middle-central theta reflecting brain activity in the anterior cingulate cortex. We discuss how early in development such brain mechanisms develop and open questions that still remain to be empirically investigated.
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.