ReviewCognitive neurodynamics2026
An event-related potentials account of brain predictive coding.
Review in Cognitive neurodynamics, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Predictive coding is a theory that tries to account for how the brain processes in an anticipatory manner the expected stimuli, and reorganizes the underlying neural networks as a consequence of the outcome of predictions: Correct or incorrect. EEG has the advantage of making a continuous and almost instantaneous record of brain activity. The present report summarizes work on Event-Related Potentials (ERPs) and reviews the neural validity of Predictive processing as a mechanism to predict future events, assess the validity of predictions, and then update the probabilities associated with future events. Using two experimental models: predictive tone sequences and central cue Posner paradigms and Bayesian modelling, the report suggests that Contingent Negative Variation (CNV) would be related to prior expectation, Mismatch negativity (MMN) and P300 to Bayesian surprise and/or prediction error, and Post Imperative Negative Variation (PINV) to the assessment of trial outcome in uncertainty situations. The review tends to support predictive coding as a theory consistent with brain operations indexed by ERPs.
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.