ArticleJournal of vision2025
Violated predictions enhance the representational fidelity of visual features in perception.
Article in Journal of vision, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Faster but less precise: expectation enhances response speed while reducing sensory fidelity.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026Article
- Article
- Multimodal evidence challenges the effectiveness of probabilistic cueing for establishing sensory expectations.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Expectation dynamically modulates the representational time course of objects and locations.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Predictive coding theories argue that recent experience establishes expectations that generate prediction errors when violated. In humans, brain imaging studies have revealed unique signatures of violated predictions in sensory cortex, but the perceptual consequences of these effects remain unknown. We had observers perform a dual-report task on the orientation of a briefly presented target grating within predictable or random sequences, while we recorded pupil size as an index of surprise. Observers first made a speeded response to categorize the orientation of the target grating (clockwise or counterclockwise from vertical), then reproduced its orientation without time pressure by rotating a bar. This allowed us to separately assess response speed and precision for the same stimuli. Critically, on half the trials, the target orientation deviated from the spatiotemporal structure established by the preceding gratings. Observers responded faster and more accurately to unexpected gratings, and pupillometry provided physiological evidence of observers' surprise in response to these events. In a second experiment, we cued the spatial location and timing of the grating and found the same pattern of results, demonstrating that unexpected orientation information is sufficient to produce faster and more precise responses, even when the location and timing of the relevant stimuli are fully expected. These findings indicate that unexpected events are prioritized by the visual system both in terms of processing speed and representational fidelity.
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.