SynthesisPloS one2025
Predicting the unpredicted … brain response: A systematic review of the feature-related visual mismatch negativity (vMMN) and the experimental parameters that affect it.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evidence for early and late prediction error-associated ERP responses during probabilistic cueing.iScience · 2026Article
- Exercise-induced neuropeptidergic and neurochemical neuroadaptation in stress regulation and emotional disorders.Acta neurologica Belgica · 2026Review
- Cognition does not automatically influence perception: Evidence from neural encoding of colors belonging to different categories.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Analysis of Task Demand Effects on Visual and Auditory Mismatch Negativity (MMN) Across Autistic and Schizotypal Traits.The European journal of neuroscience · 2026Article
- Measuring the Genuine Mismatch Negativity in the Auditory Multi-Feature Paradigm.The European journal of neuroscience · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, I consider aspects of experimental design that affect the visual mismatch negativity (vMMN)-an electrophysiological (neural) correlate of prediction error in vision that is typically largest between 150 ms and 300 ms in the event-related potential (ERP) at occipito-parietal regions on the scalp. I compiled data from 145 published studies investigating changes in a single property or feature of visual input. This review provides a concise summary of the vMMN literature on unexpected changes in features of visual input, outlining the most used (according to review) and optimal (following discussion on theoretical and practical implications) parameters of experiments investigating feature deviance for posterity as well as contemporary research. The data compiled was analysed to reveal meaningful relationships between aspects of experimental design and vMMN mean amplitude and peak latency. Results suggest that whether a control for adaptation is used, whether attention is towards vs. away from the stimulus of interest, and stimulus presentation time determines mean amplitude. Whether attention is towards vs. away from the stimulus of interest, the time between the stimulus of interest, deviant probability, and the number of standards separating deviants determines peak latency. There is also some indication that magnitude of deviance affects mean amplitude in studies exploring orientation deviance. This review and its findings elucidate potentially fruitful areas of future research.
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.