Somatosensory omissions reveal action-related predictive processing.

The intricate relation between action and somatosensory perception has been studied extensively in the past decades. Generally, a forward model is thought to predict the somatosensory consequences of an action. These models propose that when an action is reliably coupled to a tactile stimulus, unexpected absence of the stimulus should elicit prediction error. Although such omission responses have been demonstrated in the auditory modality, it remains unknown whether this mechanism generalizes across modalities. This study therefore aimed to record action-induced somatosensory omission responses using EEG in humans. Self-paced button presses were coupled to somatosensory stimuli in 88% of trials, allowing a prediction, or in 50% of trials, not allowing a prediction. In the 88% condition, stimulus omission resulted in a neural response consisting of multiple components, as revealed by temporal principal component analysis. The oN1 response suggests similar sensory sources as stimulus-evoked activity, but an origin outside primary cortex. Subsequent oN2 and oP3 responses, as previously observed in the auditory domain, likely reflect modality-unspecific higher order processes. Together, findings straightforwardly demonstrate somatosensory predictions during action and provide evidence for a partially amodal mechanism of prediction error generation.

Salient omissions-pupil dilation in response to unexpected omissions of sound and touch.

Introduction: Recent theories describe perception as an inferential process based on internal predictive models adjusted by means of prediction violations (prediction error). To study and demonstrate predictive processing in the brain the use of unexpected stimulus omissions has been suggested as a promising approach as the evoked brain responses are uncontaminated by responses to stimuli. Here, we aimed to investigate the pupil's response to unexpected stimulus omissions in order to better understand surprise and orienting of attention resulting from prediction violation. So far only few studies have used omission in pupillometry research and results have been inconsistent. Methods: This study adapted an EEG paradigm that has been shown to elicit omission responses in auditory and somatosensory modalities. Healthy adults pressed a button at their own pace, which resulted in the presentation of sounds or tactile stimuli in either 88%, 50% or 0% (motor-control) of cases. Pupil size was recorded continuously and averaged to analyze the pupil dilation response associated with each condition. Results: Results revealed that omission responses were observed in both modalities in the 88%-condition compared to motor-control. Similar pupil omission responses were observed between modalities, suggesting modality-unspecific activation of the underlying brain circuits. Discussion: In combination with previous omission studies using EEG, the findings demonstrate predictive models in brain processing and point to the involvement of subcortical structures in the omission response. Our pupillometry approach is especially suitable to study sensory prediction in vulnerable populations within the psychiatric field.

Sound omission related brain responses in children.

Action is an important way for children to learn about the world. Recent theories suggest that action is inherently accompanied by the sensory prediction of its effects. Such predictions can be revealed by rarely omitting the expected sensory consequence of the action, resulting in an omission response that is observable in the EEG. Although prediction errors play an important role in models of learning and development, little is known about omission-related brain responses in children. This study used a motor-auditory omission paradigm, testing a group of 6-8-year-old children and an adult group (N = 31 each). In an identity-specific condition, the sound coupled to the motor action was predictable, while in an identity unspecific condition the sound was unpredictable. Results of a temporal principal component analysis revealed that sound-related brain responses underlying the N1-complex differed considerably between age groups. Despite these developmental differences, omission responses (oN1) were similar between age groups. Two subcomponents of the oN1 were differently affected by specific and unspecific predictions. Results demonstrate that children, independent from the maturation of sound processing mechanisms, can implement specific and unspecific predictions as flexibly as adults. This supports theories that regard action and prediction error as important drivers of cognitive development.

Cross-modal predictive processing depends on context rather than local contingencies.

Visual symbols or events may provide predictive information on to-be-expected sound events. When the perceived sound does not confirm the visual prediction, the incongruency response (IR), a prediction error signal of the event-related brain potentials, is elicited. It is unclear whether predictions are derived from lower-level local contingencies (e.g., recent events or repetitions) or from higher-level global rules applied top-down. In a recent study, sound pitch was predicted by a preceding note symbol. IR elicitation was confined to the condition where one of two sounds was presented more frequently and was not present with equal probability of both sounds. These findings suggest that local repetitions support predictive cross-modal processing. On the other hand, IR has also been observed with equal stimulus probabilities, where visual patterns predicted the upcoming sound sequence. This suggests the application of global rules. Here, we investigated the influence of stimulus repetition on the elicitation of the IR by presenting identical trial trains of a particular visual note symbol cueing a particular sound resulting either in a congruent or an incongruent pair. Trains of four different lengths: 1, 2, 4, or 7 were presented. The IR was observed already after a single presentation of a congruent visual-cue-sound combination and did not change in amplitude as trial train length increased. We conclude that higher-level associations applied in a top-down manner are involved in elicitation of the prediction error signal reflected by the IR, independent from local contingencies.

Omission related brain responses reflect specific and unspecific action-effect couplings.

When an auditory stimulus is predicted but unexpectedly omitted, an omission response can be observed in the EEG. This endogenous response to the absence of a stimulus demonstrates the important role of prediction in perception. SanMiguel et al. (2013a) showed that in order to observe an omission response, a specific prediction concerning the identity of an upcoming stimulus is necessary. They used button presses coupled to either a single sound (predictable identity), or a random sound (unpredictable identity). In the event-related potentials, a sequence of omission responses consisting of oN1, oN2, and oP3 was observed in the single condition but not in the random condition. Given the importance of omission studies to understand the role of prediction in perception, we replicated this study. We enhanced statistical power by doubling the sample size and adjusting data pre-processing, and applied temporal principal component analysis and replication Bayes statistics. Results in the single sound condition were successfully replicated. Principal component analysis additionally revealed attenuated oN1 and oP3 omission responses in the random sound condition. These results suggest the existence of both specific and unspecific predictions along the sound processing hierarchy, where precision weighting possibly influences the strength of prediction error. Results are discussed in the framework of predictive coding and are congruent with everyday life, where uncertainty often requires broader or more general predictions.