Bridging prediction and attention in current research on perception and action

Schröger, Erich; Kotz, Sonja A.; SanMiguel, Iria

doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2015.08.037

Cited by 52 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Enhancement of sensory responses at expected time points (Bouwer & Honing, 2015;Escoffier et al, 2015;Fitzroy & Sanders, 2015;Hsu, Hämäläinen, & Waszak, 2013;Rimmele, Jolsvai, & Sussman, 2011;Tierney & Kraus, 2013) is in line with entrainment models of temporal expectations, which assume increased sensory gain at expected time points (Large & Jones, 1999). By contrast, attenuation of sensory responses at expected time points (Lange, 2009;Paris, Kim, & David, 2016;Sanabria & Correa, 2013;Sherwell, Garrido, & Cunnington, 2017;van Atteveldt et al, 2015) is in line with predictive models of brain function that assert more efficient processing of incoming information when predicted information is suppressed (Friston, 2005;Marzecová, Widmann, Sanmiguel, Kotz, & Schröger, 2017;Schröger, Kotz, & SanMiguel, 2015;Schröger, Marzecová, & Sanmiguel, 2015). Whether temporal expectations lead to enhancement or attenuation of sensory responses may depend on the type of temporal structure that affords an expectation.…”

supporting

confidence: 68%

Beat-based and memory-based temporal expectations in rhythm: similar perceptual effects, different underlying mechanisms

Bouwer

Honing

Slagter

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Predicting the timing of incoming information allows the brain to optimize information processing in dynamic environments. Behaviorally, temporal expectations have been shown to facilitate processing of events at expected time points, such as sounds that coincide with the beat in musical rhythm. Yet, temporal expectations can develop based on different forms of structure in the environment, not just the regularity afforded by a musical beat. Little is still known about how different types of temporal expectations are neurally implemented and affect performance. Here, we orthogonally manipulated the periodicity and predictability of rhythmic sequences to examine the mechanisms underlying beat-based and memory-based temporal expectations, respectively. Behaviorally and using EEG, we looked at the effects of beat-based and memory-based expectations on auditory processing when rhythms were task relevant or task irrelevant. At expected time points, both beat-based and memory-based expectations facilitated target detection and led to attenuation of P1 and N1 responses, even when expectations were task-irrelevant (unattended). For beat-based expectations, we additionally found reduced target detection and enhanced N1 responses for events at unexpected time points (e.g., off-beat), regardless of the presence of memory-based expectations or task relevance. This latter finding supports the notion that periodicity selectively induces rhythmic fluctuations in neural excitability and furthermore indicates that while beat-based and memory-based expectations may similarly affect auditory processing of expected events, their underlying neural mechanisms may be different.

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 68%

Beat-based and memory-based temporal expectations in rhythm: similar perceptual effects, different underlying mechanisms

Bouwer

Honing

Slagter

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Enhanced predictive timing is attributed to the capacity to highten attending to expected times in speech or music, possibly, via phase-locking of neuro-cognitive [ 9 5 _ T D $ D I F F ] oscillations (e.g., Calderone, Lakatos, Butler, & Castellanos, 2014;Large & Jones, 1999; see also Schön & Tillmann, 2015; for a recent overview). Another consequence of enhanced predictive timing via rhythms is that it facilitates the coordination of complex movement sequences and their smooth execution through the coupling of perception and action (see Maes, Leman, Palmer, & Wanderley, 2014;Schröger, Kotz, & SanMiguel, 2015;Vuust & Witek, 2014; for reviews). Thereby, enhanced predictive timing could be particularly beneficial for auditory-motor integration and articulation in participants who stutter (e.g., Harrington, 1988).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal variability in sung productions of adolescents who stutter

Falk

Maslow

Thum³

et al. 2016

Journal of Communication Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Converging evidence suggests that stimulus predictability shapes processing at the level of sensory cortex by modulating postsynaptic efficacy or gain (Moran et al, 2013; for review, see Schröger et al, 2015). Even within the same region, neurons can be sensitive to sensory regularities at different time scales, as shown for the auditory cortex in the context of stimulus-specific adaptation (Ulanovsky et al, 2004; Rubin et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Cumulative Effects of Predictability on Synaptic Gain in the Auditory Processing Stream

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stimulus predictability can lead to substantial modulations of brain activity, such as shifts in sustained magnetic field amplitude, measured with magnetoencephalography (MEG). Here, we provide a mechanistic explanation of these effects using MEG data acquired from healthy human volunteers (N = 13, 7 female). In a source-level analysis of induced responses, we established the effects of orthogonal predictability manipulations of rapid tone-pip sequences (namely, sequence regularity and alphabet size) along the auditory processing stream. In auditory cortex, regular sequences with smaller alphabets induced greater gamma activity. Furthermore, sequence regularity shifted induced activity in frontal regions toward higher frequencies. To model these effects in terms of the underlying neurophysiology, we used dynamic causal modeling for cross-spectral density and estimated slow fluctuations in neural (postsynaptic) gain. Using the model-based parameters, we accurately explain the sensor-level sustained field amplitude, demonstrating that slow changes in synaptic efficacy, combined with sustained sensory input, can result in profound and sustained effects on neural responses to predictable sensory streams.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Brain activity can be strongly modulated by the predictability of stimuli it is currently processing. An example of such a modulation is a shift in sustained magnetic field amplitude, measured with magnetoencephalography. Here, we provide a mechanistic explanation of these effects. First, we establish the oscillatory neural correlates of independent predictability manipulations in hierarchically distinct areas of the auditory processing stream. Next, we use a biophysically realistic computational model to explain these effects in terms of the underlying neurophysiology. Finally, using the model-based parameters describing neural gain modulation, we can explain the previously unexplained effects observed at the sensor level. This demonstrates that slow modulations of synaptic gain can result in profound and sustained effects on neural activity.

show abstract

Bridging prediction and attention in current research on perception and action

Cited by 52 publications

References 72 publications

Beat-based and memory-based temporal expectations in rhythm: similar perceptual effects, different underlying mechanisms

Beat-based and memory-based temporal expectations in rhythm: similar perceptual effects, different underlying mechanisms

Temporal variability in sung productions of adolescents who stutter

The Cumulative Effects of Predictability on Synaptic Gain in the Auditory Processing Stream

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About