The predictive coding model of perception proposes that neuronal responses are modulated by the amount of sensory input that the internal prediction cannot account for (i.e., prediction error). However, there is little consensus on what constitutes nonpredicted stimuli. Conceptually, whereas mispredicted stimuli may induce both prediction error generated by prediction that is not perceived and prediction error generated by sensory input that is not anticipated, unpredicted stimuli involves no top-down, only bottom-up, propagation of information in the system. Here, we examined the possibility that the processing of mispredicted and unpredicted stimuli are dissociable at the neurophysiological level using human electroencephalography. We presented participants with sets of five tones in which the frequency of the fifth tones was predicted, mispredicted, or unpredicted. Participants were required to press a key when they detected a softer fifth tone to maintain their attention. We found that mispredicted and unpredicted stimuli are associated with different amount of cortical activity, probably reflecting differences in prediction error. Moreover, relative to predicted stimuli, the mispredicted prediction error manifested as neuronal enhancement and the unpredicted prediction error manifested as neuronal attenuation on the N1 event-related potential component. These results highlight the importance of differentiating between the two nonpredicted stimuli in theoretical work on predictive coding.

The sense of agency (SoA) experienced in joint action is an essential subjective dimension of human cooperativeness, but we still know little about the specific factors that contribute to its emergence or alteration. In the present study, dyads of participants were instructed to coordinate their key presses to move a cursor up to a specific target (i.e., to achieve a common goal). We applied random deviations on the cursor's trajectory to manipulate the motor fluency of the joint action, while the agents' motor roles were either balanced (i.e., equivalent) or unbalanced (i.e., one agent contributed more than the other), making the agents more or less pivotal to the joint action. Then, the final outcomes were shared equally, fairly (i.e., reflecting individual motor contributions) or arbitrarily in an all-or-none fashion, between the co-agents. Self and joint SoA were measured through self-reports about feeling of control (FoC), and electrodermal activity was recorded during the whole motor task. We observed that self and joint FoC were reduced in the case of low motor fluency, pointing out the importance of sensorimotor cues for both I-and we-modes. Moreover, while self FoC was reduced in the low pivotality condition (i.e., low motor role), joint FoC was significantly enhanced when agents' roles and rewards were symmetrical (i.e. equal). Skin conductance responses to rewards were impacted by the way outcomes were shared between partners (i.e., fairly, equally or arbitrarily) but not by the individual gains, which demonstrates the sensitivity of low-level physiological reactions to external signs of fairness. Skin conductance level was also reduced in the fair context, where rewards were shared according to individual motor contributions, relative to the all-or-none context, which could mirror the feeling of effective responsibility and control over actions' outcomes.