Omission P3 after voluntary action indexes the formation of action-driven prediction

Effects of sensory modality and task relevance on omitted stimulus potentials

Omitted stimulus potentials (OSPs) occur when a sensory stimulus is unexpectedly omitted. They are thought to reflect predictions about upcoming sensory events. The present study examined how OSPs differ across the sensory modalities of predicted stimuli. Twenty-nine university students were asked to press a mouse button at a regular interval of 1-2 s, which was immediately followed by either a visual or auditory stimulus in different blocks. The stimuli were sometimes omitted (p = 0.2), to which event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded. The results showed that stimulus omissions in both modalities elicited ERP waveforms consisting of three components, oN1, oN2, and oP3. The peak latencies of these components were shorter in the auditory modality than in the visual modality. The amplitudes of OSPs were larger when participants were told that the omission indicated their poor performance (i.e., they pressed a button at an irregular interval) than when it was irrelevant to their performance. These findings suggest that OSPs occur from around 100 ms in a modality-specific manner and increase in amplitude depending on the task relevance of stimulus omissions.

Quantifying evidential value and selective reporting in recent and 10-year past psychophysiological literature: A pre-registered P-curve analysis

Selective reporting (i.e., only reporting significant findings as opposed to all analyses or results) is a questionable research practice that undermines the integrity of published research. Psychophysiology research may be susceptible to selective reporting, given the high number of decision points and methodological complexity in analyses of psychophysiology data. We aimed to assess the presence of selective reporting and evidential value (i.e., that significant results are due to true underlying effects) in recent and past psychophysiological research by utilizing p-curve analyses. Study protocols and methods were pre-registered on the Open Science Framework (OSF). P-values and the associated test statistics were extracted from articles in the most recent issue (as of January 2018) and 10-year previous counterpart issue of three major psychophysiology journals: Psychophysiology, International Journal of Psychophysiology, and Journal of Psychophysiology. Using the p-curve application, 10 primary p-curves were conducted: all recent articles, all past articles, recent articles split by journal, past articles split by journal, recent cognitive electrophysiology articles, and past cognitive electrophysiology articles. Evidential value and generally adequate average power (≥78% average power) were present in all p-curves, except those that only included articles from the Journal of Psychophysiology because of the small number of articles published in the journal. Findings provide some positive news and indicate that, generally, results were not selectively reported, and selective reporting may not be a primary issue for this sample of psychophysiological research. Future p-curve analyses examining sub-disciplines of psychophysiology are recommended.