| Literature DB >> 32282823 |
Daniel S Kluger1,2,3, Nico Broers2,3, Marlen A Roehe2,3, Moritz F Wurm4, Niko A Busch2,3, Ricarda I Schubotz2,3,5.
Abstract
While prediction errors have been established to instigate learning through model adaptation, recent studies have stressed the role of model-compliant events in predictive processing. Specifically, probabilistic information at critical points in time (so-called checkpoints) has been suggested to be sampled in order to evaluate the internal model, particularly in uncertain contexts. This way, initial model-based expectations are iteratively reaffirmed under uncertainty, even in the absence of prediction errors. Using electroencephalography (EEG), the present study aimed to investigate the interplay of such global uncertainty information and local adjustment cues prompting on-line adjustments of expectations. Within a stream of single digits, participants were to detect ordered sequences (i.e., 3-4-5-6-7) that had a regular length of five digits and were occasionally extended to seven digits. Over time, these extensions were either rare (low irreducible uncertainty) or frequent (high uncertainty) and could be unexpected or indicated by incidental colour cues. Accounting for cue information, an N400 component was revealed as the correlate of locally unexpected (vs expected) outcomes, reflecting effortful integration of incongruous information. As for model-compliant information, multivariate pattern decoding within the P3b time frame demonstrated effective exploitation of local (adjustment cues vs non-informative analogues) and global information (high vs low uncertainty regular endings) sampled from probabilistic events. Finally, superior fit of a global model (disregarding local adjustments) compared to a local model (including local adjustments) in a representational similarity analysis underscored the precedence of global reference frames in hierarchical predictive processing. Overall, results suggest that just like error-induced model adaptation, model evaluation is not limited to either local or global information. Following the hierarchical organisation of predictive processing, model evaluation too can occur at several levels of the processing hierarchy.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32282823 PMCID: PMC7153873 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231021
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1(A) Exemplary trial succession and time frame of the corresponding response for ordered sequences. (B) Experimental manipulations and resulting transition probabilities between trials. Bold framing indicates events of interest for EEG analyses; red framing indicates relatively unexpected events. (C) Top: Mean offset latencies for regular and extended sequences as a function of adjustment cueing and irreducible uncertainty (solid bars = low, hatched bars = high). ANOVA revealed significant main effects of expectation compliance, adjustment cueing, and irreducible uncertainty (see main text for details). Bottom left: Schematic of sampling premature and quick button releases for uncued (REG-) and cued regular sequences (REG+). Bottom right: Mean count of releases within [-500, 500] ms for REG- and REG+ sequences. Error bars show standard error of the mean (SEM). AC = adjustment cue, REG = regular, EXT = extended, *** = p < .001.
Fig 3(A) Group-level decoding accuracies over time. Shaded areas indicate significant temporal clusters. (B) Top: Model RDMs predicting representational similarity in the EEG data based on distinct event characteristics. Globally (left) and locally (right) unexpected events are marked in red, respectively. Bottom: Group-level correlations of both model RDMs with the neural RDM. Shaded area around the curve shows SEM of group average correlation. AC = adjustment cues, CP = checkpoints, REG = regular endings, EXT = sequential extensions.
Fig 2Direct comparison of unexpected (EXT-, REG+) and expected outcomes (EXT+, REG-) revealed a significant N400 component peaking around 442 ms over parieto-central electrodes.
The difference curve includes M ± STD of individual data; bottom panel shows component evolution over time.