Study: Prediction errors also play a role in the context of highly dynamic perceptual events

A popular theory in neuroscience called predictive coding proposes that the brain produces all the time expectations that are compared with incoming information. Errors arising from differences between actual input and prediction are then iteratively minimized along a hierarchical processing scheme.

It is assumed that such stepwise iteration leads to updating of brain predictions so that internal prediction errors are finally explained away.

Neuroscientists at the Ruhr-University Bochum (RUB) together with colleagues at the Freiburg University show that this is not strictly the case. Instead, they show that prediction errors can occasionally appear as visual illusion when viewing rapid image sequences.

Thus, rather than being explained away prediction errors remain in fact accessible at final processing stages forming perception. Previous theories of predictive coding need therefore to be revised. The study is reported in Plos One on 4. May 2020.

Our visual system starts making predictions within a few milliseconds

To fixate objects in the outside world, our eyes perform far more than one hundred thousand of rapid movements per day called saccades. However, as soon as our eyes rest about 100 milliseconds, the brain starts making predictions. Differences between previous and current image contents are then forwarded to subsequent processing stages as prediction errors.

The advantage to deal with differences instead of complete image information is obvious: similar to video compression techniques the data volume is drastically reduced. Another advantage turns up literally only at second sight: statistically, there is a high probability that the next saccade lands on locations where differences to previous image contents are largest.

Thus, calculating potential changes of image content as the differences to previous contents prepares the visual system early on for new input.

To test whether the brain uses indeed such a strategy, the authors presented rapid sequences of two images to human volunteers. In the first image two gratings were superimposed, in the second image only one of the gratings was present. The task was to report the orientation of the last seen single grating.

In most cases, the participants correctly reported the orientation of the present orientation, as expected. However, surprisingly, in some cases an orientation was perceived that was exactly orthogonal to the present orientation. That is, participants saw sometimes the difference between the previous superimposed gratings and the present single grating.

Seeing the difference instead of the real current input is here a visual illusion that can be interpreted as directly seeing the prediction error."

Robert Staadt, Study First Author,  Ruhr-University Bochum

Avoiding the pigeonhole benefits flexibility

"Within the framework of the predictive coding theory, prediction errors are mostly conceived in the context of higher cognitive functions that are coupled to conscious expectations. However, we demonstrate that prediction errors also play a role in the context of highly dynamic perceptual events that take place within fractions of a second," explains Dr. Dirk Jancke, head of the Optical Imaging Group at the Institute of Neural Computation.

The present study reveals that the visual system simultaneously keeps up information about past, current, and possible future image contents. Such strategy allows both stability and flexibility when viewing rapid image sequences.

"Altogether, our results support hypotheses that consider perception as a result of a decision process," says Jancke. Hence, prediction errors should not be sorted out too early, as they might become relevant for following events.

Visual perception underlies decision making

In next studies the scientists will scrutinize the sets of parameters that drive the perceptual illusion most effectively. Besides straightforward physical parameters like stimulus duration, brightness, and contrast, other, more elusive factors that characterize psychological features might be involved.

The authors' long-term perspective is the development of practical visual tests that can be used for an early diagnosis of cognitive disorders connected to rapid perceptual decision processes.

Source:
Journal reference:

Staadt, R., et al. (2020) Perception of the difference between past and present stimulus: a rare orientation illusion may indicate incidental access to prediction error-like signals. Plos One. doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0232349.

Comments

The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News Medical.
Post a new comment
Post

While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses. Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for medical information you must always consult a medical professional before acting on any information provided.

Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their privacy principles.

Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential information.

Read the full Terms & Conditions.

You might also like...
New brain targets for GLP1-based obesity drugs may reduce weight without nausea