ArticleNature communications2025
Learning from imagined experiences via an endogenous prediction error.
Article in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Experiences shape preferences. This is particularly the case when they deviate from our expectations and thus elicit prediction errors. Here we show that prediction errors do not only occur in response to actual events - they also arise endogenously in response to merely imagined events. Specifically, people repeatedly chose between different acquaintances and then imagined interacting with them. Our results show that they acquired a preference for acquaintances with whom they had pictured unexpectedly pleasant events. This learning can best be accounted for by a computational model that calculates prediction errors based on these rewarding experiences. Using functional MRI, we show that the prediction error is mediated via striatal activity. This activity, in turn, seems to update preferences about the individuals by updating their cortical representations. Our findings demonstrate that imaginings can violate our own expectations and thus drive endogenous learning by coopting a neural system that implements reinforcement learning.
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.