Cited by 41Hallucinations in medical conditionsSchizophrenia research and treatmentMental Health and Psychiatry

Auditory hallucinations: Expectation–perception model

Nazimek, J.M., Hunter, M.D., Woodruff, P.W.R.·2012·Medical Hypotheses

Abstract

In this paper, we aimed to present a hypothesis that would explain the mechanism of auditory hallucinations, one of the main symptoms of schizophrenia. We propose that auditory hallucinations arise from abnormalities in the predictive coding which underlies normal perception, specifically, from the absence or attenuation of prediction error. The suggested deficiencies in processing prediction error could arise from (1) abnormal modulation of thalamus by prefrontal cortex, (2) absence or impaired transmission of external input, (3) dysfunction of the auditory and association cortex, (4) neurotransmitter dysfunction and abnormal connectivity, and (5) hyperactivity activity in auditory cortex and broad prior probability. If there is no prediction error, the initially vague prior probability develops into an explicit percept in the absence of external input, as a result of a recursive pathological exchange between auditory and prefrontal cortex. Unlike existing explanations of auditory hallucinations, we propose concrete mechanisms which underlie the imbalance between perceptual expectation and external input. Impaired processing of prediction error is reflected in reduced mismatch negativity and increased tendency to report non-existing meaningful language stimuli in white noise, shown by those suffering from auditory hallucinations. We believe that the expectation-perception model of auditory hallucinations offers a comprehensive explanation of the underpinnings of auditory hallucinations in both patients and those not diagnosed with mental illness. Therefore, our hypothesis has the potential to fill the gaps in the existing knowledge about this distressing phenomenon and contribute to improved effectiveness of treatments, targeting specific mechanisms.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.mehy.2012.03.014

Cites

100 of 100 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nazimek, J. M., Hunter, M. D., & Woodruff, P. W. R.
Affiliations
University of Sheffield (GB)
Corresponding author
Nazimek, J.M.
Venue
Medical Hypotheses
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-06
Volume
78
Issue
6
Pages
802-810
ISSN
0306-9877 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2059263907
Cited by
41
References
100
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Medical Hypotheses (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of Sheffield
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hallucinations in medical conditions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Mental Health and Psychiatry
Keywords
auditory hallucinations, schizophrenia, predictive coding, prediction error, prefrontal cortex, auditory cortex, mismatch negativity, prior probability, neurotransmitter dysfunction, neuronal connectivity, hallucination treatment
MeSH terms
Auditory Diseases, Central, Hallucinations, Humans, Models, Biological, Thalamus, Prefrontal Cortex, Neurotransmitter Agents

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review