Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37781257›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2023

"What" and "when" predictions modulate auditory processing in a mutually congruent manner.

Drew Cappotto, Dan Luo, Hiu Wai Lai, Fei Peng, Lucia Melloni, Jan Wilbert Hendrik Schnupp, Ryszard Auksztulewicz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. "What" and "When" Predictions Jointly Modulate Speech Processing.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    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

7 authors.

Drew CappottoDepartment of Neuroscience, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Dan LuoDepartment of Neuroscience, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Hiu Wai LaiDepartment of Neuroscience, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Fei PengDepartment of Neuroscience, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Lucia MelloniDepartment of Neuroscience, Max Planck Institute for Empirical Aesthetics, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Jan Wilbert Hendrik SchnuppDepartment of Neuroscience, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.
Ryszard AuksztulewiczDepartment of Neuroscience, City University of Hong Kong, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Extracting regularities from ongoing stimulus streams to form predictions is crucial for adaptive behavior. Such regularities exist in terms of the content of the stimuli and their timing, both of which are known to interactively modulate sensory processing. In real-world stimulus streams such as music, regularities can occur at multiple levels, both in terms of contents (e.g., predictions relating to individual notes vs. their more complex groups) and timing (e.g., pertaining to timing between intervals vs. the overall beat of a musical phrase). However, it is unknown whether the brain integrates predictions in a manner that is mutually congruent (e.g., if "beat" timing predictions selectively interact with "what" predictions falling on pulses which define the beat), and whether integrating predictions in different timing conditions relies on dissociable neural correlates. Methods: To address these questions, our study manipulated "what" and "when" predictions at different levels - (local) interval-defining and (global) beat-defining - within the same stimulus stream, while neural activity was recorded using electroencephalogram (EEG) in participants ( Results: Our results reveal that temporal predictions based on beat or interval timing modulated mismatch responses to violations of "what" predictions happening at the predicted time points, and that these modulations were shared between types of temporal predictions in terms of the spatiotemporal distribution of EEG signals. Effective connectivity analysis using dynamic causal modeling showed that the integration of "what" and "when" predictions selectively increased connectivity at relatively late cortical processing stages, between the superior temporal gyrus and the fronto-parietal network. Discussion: Taken together, these results suggest that the brain integrates different predictions with a high degree of mutual congruence, but in a shared and distributed cortical network. This finding contrasts with recent studies indicating separable mechanisms for beat-based and memory-based predictive processing.

Indexed as

auditory neurosciencedynamic causal modelingelectroencephalographypredictive codingtemporal processing

Identifiers

PMID37781257
PMCPMC10540699

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.