ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2024
Self-initiation enhances perceptual processing of auditory stimuli in an online study.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Regression to the mean explains perception of action consequences.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Sensory Attenuation of Auditory P2 Responses is Modulated by the Sense of Action Timing Control.Psychophysiology · 2025Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding how the brain incorporates sensory and motor information will enable better theory building on human perception and behavior. In this study, we aimed to estimate the influence of predictive mechanisms on the magnitude and variability of sensory attenuation in two online samples. After the presentation of a visual cue stimulus, participants (Experiment 1: N = 224, Experiment 2: N = 84) compared the loudness of two consecutive tones in a two-alternative forced-choice task. In Experiment 1, the first tone was either self-initiated or not; in Experiment 2, the second tone was either self-initiated or not (active and passive condition, respectively). We further manipulated identity prediction (i.e., the congruence of pre-learned cue-sound combinations; congruent vs. incongruent), and the duration of the onset delay (to account for effects of attentional differences between the passive and active condition, 50 ms vs. 0 ms). We critically discuss our results within the framework of both classical (i.e., motor-based forward models) and contemporary approaches (i.e., predictive processing framework). Contrary to our preregistered hypothesis, we observed enhanced perceptual processing, instead of attenuation, for self-initiated auditory sensory input. Further, our results reveal an effect of fixed sound delays on the processing of motor and non-motor-based predictive information, and may point to according shifts in attention, leading to a perceptual bias. These results might best be captured by a hybrid explanatory model, combining predictions based on self-initiated motor action with a global predictive mechanism.
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.