Prior Precision Modulates the Minimization of Auditory Prediction Error

Predictive waves in the autism-schizophrenia continuum: A novel biobehavioral model

The brain is a predictive machine. Converging data suggests a diametric predictive strategy from autism spectrum disorders (ASD) to schizophrenic spectrum disorders (SSD). Whereas perceptual inference in ASD is rigidly shaped by incoming sensory information, the SSD population is prone to overestimate the precision of their priors' models. Growing evidence considers brain oscillations pivotal biomarkers to understand how top-down predictions integrate bottom-up input. Starting from the conceptualization of ASD and SSD as oscillopathies, we introduce an integrated perspective that ascribes the maladjustments of the predictive mechanism to dysregulation of neural synchronization. According to this proposal, disturbances in the oscillatory profile do not allow the appropriate trade-off between descending predictive signal, overweighted in SSD, and ascending prediction errors, overweighted in ASD. These opposing imbalances both result in an ill-adapted reaction to external challenges. This approach offers a neuro-computational model capable of linking predictive coding theories with electrophysiological findings, aiming to increase knowledge on the neuronal foundations of the two spectra features and stimulate hypothesis-driven rehabilitation/research perspectives.

Both contextual regularity and selective attention affect the reduction of precision-weighted prediction errors but in distinct manners

Predictive coding model of perception postulates that the primary objective of the brain is to infer the causes of sensory inputs by reducing prediction errors (i.e., the discrepancy between expected and actual information). Moreover, prediction errors are weighted by their precision (i.e., inverse variance), which quantifies the degree of certainty about the variables. There is accumulating evidence that the reduction of precision-weighted prediction errors can be affected by contextual regularity (as an external factor) and selective attention (as an internal factor). However, it is unclear whether the two factors function together or separately. Here we used electroencephalography (EEG) to examine the putative interaction of contextual regularity and selective attention on this reduction process. Participants were presented with pairs of regular and irregular quartets in attended and unattended conditions. We found that contextual regularity and selective attention independently modulated the N1/MMN where the repetition effect was absent. On the P2, the two factors respectively interacted with the repetition effect without interacting with each other. The results showed that contextual regularity and selective attention likely affect the reduction of precision-weighted prediction errors in distinct manners. While contextual regularity finetunes our efficiency at reducing precision-weighted prediction errors, selective attention seems to modulate the reduction process following the Matthew effect of accumulated advantage.

Evaluating the neurophysiological evidence for predictive processing as a model of perception

For many years, the dominant theoretical framework guiding research into the neural origins of perceptual experience has been provided by hierarchical feedforward models, in which sensory inputs are passed through a series of increasingly complex feature detectors. However, the long-standing orthodoxy of these accounts has recently been challenged by a radically different set of theories that contend that perception arises from a purely inferential process supported by two distinct classes of neurons: those that transmit predictions about sensory states and those that signal sensory information that deviates from those predictions. Although these predictive processing (PP) models have become increasingly influential in cognitive neuroscience, they are also criticized for lacking the empirical support to justify their status. This limited evidence base partly reflects the considerable methodological challenges that are presented when trying to test the unique predictions of these models. However, a confluence of technological and theoretical advances has prompted a recent surge in human and nonhuman neurophysiological research seeking to fill this empirical gap. Here, we will review this new research and evaluate the degree to which its findings support the key claims of PP.