The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Hallucinations and perceptual inference
Open accessAbstract
This commentary takes a closer look at how “constructive models of subjective perception,” referred to by Collerton et al. (sect. 2), might contribute to the Perception and Attention Deficit (PAD) model. It focuses on the neuronal mechanisms that could mediate hallucinations, or false inference – in particular, the role of cholinergic systems in encoding uncertainty in the context of hierarchical Bayesian models of perceptual inference (Friston 2002b; Yu & Dayan 2002).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“the main problem in schizophrenia lies not with the prediction of sensory input per se, but in the delicate balance of precision ascribed to prior beliefs and sensory evidence (Friston, 2005; Corlett et al., 2011).”
From The Computational Anatomy of Psychosis (2013) · cites this paper as Friston, 2005
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“MMN is widely considered to be a robust marker of psychosis15, thought to reflect an attempt to minimize this prediction error and capture its disruption16–19.”
From Deviations in effective connectivity explain different hallucination subtypes in Parkinson's disease psychosis (2026) · cites this paper as [18]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Hallucinations could be understood as the result of an increase in the relative precision of prior beliefs, such that the posterior beliefs are impervious to contradictory – but imprecise – sensory evidence.”
From The Computational Anatomy of Psychosis (2013) · cites this paper as Friston, 2005
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Alternatively, hallucinations may result from enhanced rather than weakened top-down predictive signaling (i.e. increased precision of priors) on neural activity in sensory cortices (83).”
From The Predictive Coding Account of Psychosis (2018) · cites this paper as [83]
In the citing paper
“One possibility is that hallucinations result from an overly strong effect of top-down predictive signals on neural activity in sensory cortices.133,134”
From Are hallucinations due to an imbalance between excitatory and inhibitory influences on the brain? (2016) · cites this paper as [133]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 201–201 of 201
Distinct processing of ambiguous speech in people with non-clinical auditory verbal hallucinations
Alderson-Day, B., Lima, C. F., Evans, S., Krishnan, S., Shanmugalingam, P., Fernyhough, C., & Scott, S. K. (2017) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/awx206 · Cited by 108
“…more generally—posit a shift towards prior expectations, perhaps as a response to inherently unreliable prediction errors, or a top-down failure to modulate their precision (Grossberg, 2000; Friston, 2005; Fletcher and Frith, 2009; Adams et al., 2013; Corlett et al., 2016; Powers et al., 2016).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Friston, K. J.
- Affiliations
- UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Friston, Karl J.
- ORCID
- Friston, Karl J.
- Venue
- Behavioral and Brain Sciences
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2005-12
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 764-766
- ISSN
- 0140-525X (ISSN-L)
- 1469-1825
- OpenAlex
- W2011459890
- Cited by
- 196
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 0.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- discovery.ucl.ac.uk
- Locations
- Behavioral and Brain Sciences (publishedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hallucinations in medical conditions
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
- Keywords
- hallucinations, perceptual inference, cholinergic system, uncertainty encoding, Bayesian hierarchical model
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
