Attention is required for canonical brain signature of prediction error despite early encoding of the stimuli
Prediction error is a basic component of predictive-coding theory of brain processing. According to the theory, each stage of brain processing of sensory information generates a model of the current sensory input; subsequent input is compared against the model and only if there is a mismatch, a pred...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2023-06-01
|
| Series: | PLoS Biology |
| Online Access: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10281583/?tool=EBI |
| _version_ | 1797797893412749312 |
|---|---|
| author | Alie G. Male Robert P. O’Shea |
| author_facet | Alie G. Male Robert P. O’Shea |
| author_sort | Alie G. Male |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Prediction error is a basic component of predictive-coding theory of brain processing. According to the theory, each stage of brain processing of sensory information generates a model of the current sensory input; subsequent input is compared against the model and only if there is a mismatch, a prediction error, is further processing performed. Recently, Smout and colleagues found that a signature of prediction error, the visual (v) mismatch negativity (MMN), for a fundamental property of visual input—its orientation—was absent without endogenous attention on the stimuli. This is remarkable because the weight of evidence for MMNs from audition and vision is that they occur without endogenous attention. To resolve this discrepancy, we conducted an experiment addressing 2 alternative explanations for Smout and colleagues’ finding: that it was from a lack of reproducibility or that participants’ visual systems did not encode the stimuli when attention was on something else. We conducted a similar experiment to that of Smout and colleagues. We showed 21 participants sequences of identically oriented Gabor patches, standards, and, unpredictably, otherwise identical, Gabor patches differing in orientation by ±15°, ±30°, and ±60°, deviants. To test whether participants encoded the orientation of the standards, we varied the number of standards preceding a deviant, allowing us to search for a decrease in activity with the number of repetitions of standards—repetition suppression. We diverted participants’ attention from the oriented stimuli with a central, letter-detection task. We reproduced Smout and colleagues’ finding of no vMMN without endogenous attention, strengthening their finding. We found that our participants showed repetition suppression: They did encode the stimuli preattentively. We also found early processing of deviants. We discuss various explanations why the earlier processing did not extend into the vMMN time window, including low precision of prediction. Building on a previous PLOS Biology manuscript, this update article provides new evidence that canonical brain signatures of prediction error are only generated in the presence of attention to the visual stimuli, despite the fact that early brain encoding of the stimuli can be observed. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-13T03:56:17Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-c5179dc6956a476ead5efb6bc8f6b2e5 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1544-9173 1545-7885 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-13T03:56:17Z |
| publishDate | 2023-06-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLoS Biology |
| spelling | doaj.art-c5179dc6956a476ead5efb6bc8f6b2e52023-06-22T05:31:01ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS Biology1544-91731545-78852023-06-01216Attention is required for canonical brain signature of prediction error despite early encoding of the stimuliAlie G. MaleRobert P. O’SheaPrediction error is a basic component of predictive-coding theory of brain processing. According to the theory, each stage of brain processing of sensory information generates a model of the current sensory input; subsequent input is compared against the model and only if there is a mismatch, a prediction error, is further processing performed. Recently, Smout and colleagues found that a signature of prediction error, the visual (v) mismatch negativity (MMN), for a fundamental property of visual input—its orientation—was absent without endogenous attention on the stimuli. This is remarkable because the weight of evidence for MMNs from audition and vision is that they occur without endogenous attention. To resolve this discrepancy, we conducted an experiment addressing 2 alternative explanations for Smout and colleagues’ finding: that it was from a lack of reproducibility or that participants’ visual systems did not encode the stimuli when attention was on something else. We conducted a similar experiment to that of Smout and colleagues. We showed 21 participants sequences of identically oriented Gabor patches, standards, and, unpredictably, otherwise identical, Gabor patches differing in orientation by ±15°, ±30°, and ±60°, deviants. To test whether participants encoded the orientation of the standards, we varied the number of standards preceding a deviant, allowing us to search for a decrease in activity with the number of repetitions of standards—repetition suppression. We diverted participants’ attention from the oriented stimuli with a central, letter-detection task. We reproduced Smout and colleagues’ finding of no vMMN without endogenous attention, strengthening their finding. We found that our participants showed repetition suppression: They did encode the stimuli preattentively. We also found early processing of deviants. We discuss various explanations why the earlier processing did not extend into the vMMN time window, including low precision of prediction. Building on a previous PLOS Biology manuscript, this update article provides new evidence that canonical brain signatures of prediction error are only generated in the presence of attention to the visual stimuli, despite the fact that early brain encoding of the stimuli can be observed.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10281583/?tool=EBI |
| spellingShingle | Alie G. Male Robert P. O’Shea Attention is required for canonical brain signature of prediction error despite early encoding of the stimuli PLoS Biology |
| title | Attention is required for canonical brain signature of prediction error despite early encoding of the stimuli |
| title_full | Attention is required for canonical brain signature of prediction error despite early encoding of the stimuli |
| title_fullStr | Attention is required for canonical brain signature of prediction error despite early encoding of the stimuli |
| title_full_unstemmed | Attention is required for canonical brain signature of prediction error despite early encoding of the stimuli |
| title_short | Attention is required for canonical brain signature of prediction error despite early encoding of the stimuli |
| title_sort | attention is required for canonical brain signature of prediction error despite early encoding of the stimuli |
| url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10281583/?tool=EBI |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT aliegmale attentionisrequiredforcanonicalbrainsignatureofpredictionerrordespiteearlyencodingofthestimuli AT robertposhea attentionisrequiredforcanonicalbrainsignatureofpredictionerrordespiteearlyencodingofthestimuli |