The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Interpreting the Mismatch Negativity
Abstract
The widely accepted “memory-mismatch” interpretation of the mismatch negativity (MMN) event-related brain potential (ERP) suggests that an MMN is elicited when an acoustic event deviates from a memory record describing the immediate history of the sound sequence. The first variant of the memory-mismatch theory suggested that the memory underlying MMN generation was a strong auditory sensory memory trace, which encoded the repetitive standard sound. This “trace-mismatch” explanation of MMN has been primarily based on results obtained in the auditory oddball paradigm. However, in recent years, MMN has been observed in stimulus paradigms containing no frequently repeating sound. We now suggest a different variant of the memory-mismatch interpretation of MMN in order to provide a unified explanation of all MMN phenomena. The regularity-violation explanation of MMN assumes that the memory records retaining the history of auditory stimulation are regularity representations. These representations encode rules extracted from the regular intersound relationships, which are mapped to the concrete sound sequence by finely detailed auditory sensory information. Auditory events are compared with temporally aligned predictions drawn from the regularity representations (predictive models) and the observable MMN response reflects a process updating the representations of those detected regularities whose prediction was mismatched by the acoustic input. It is further suggested that the auditory deviance detection system serves to organize sound in the brain: The predictive models maintained by the MMN-generating process provide the basis of temporal grouping, a crucial step in the formation of auditory objects.
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.
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
Cites
Fodor, J. A. (1983) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/4737.001.0001 · Cited by 7,734
Broadbent, D. E. (1958) · doi:10.1037/10037-000 · Cited by 4,337
Is the P300 component a manifestation of context updating?
Donchin, E., & Coles, M. G. H. (1988) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00058027 · Cited by 3,585
Synaptic plasticity and dysconnection in schizophrenia
Stephan, K. E., Baldeweg, T., & Friston, K. J. (2006) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.10.005 · Cited by 841
Attentive novelty detection in humans is governed by pre-attentive sensory memory
Tiitinen, H., May, P., Reinikainen, K., & Näätänen, R. (1994) · Nature · doi:10.1038/372090a0 · Cited by 637
Mismatch negativity-a unique measure of sensory processing in audition.
Näätänen, R., & Alho, K. (1995) · International Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.3109/00207459508986107 · Cited by 340
Mismatch negativity potentials and cognitive impairment in schizophrenia
Baldeweg, T., Klugman, A., Gruzelier, J., & Hirsch, S. R. (2004) · Schizophrenia Research · doi:10.1016/j.schres.2003.09.009 · Cited by 321
Temporal window of integration revealed by MMN to sound omission.
Yabe, H., Tervaniemi, M., Reinikainen, K., & Näätänen, R. (1997) · NeuroReport · doi:10.1097/00001756-199705260-00035 · Cited by 313
Cited by
Prediction, cognition and the brain
Bubic (2010) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2010.00025 · Cited by 647
Evidence for a hierarchy of predictions and prediction errors in human cortex
Wacongne, C., Labyt, E., van Wassenhove, V., Bekinschtein, T., Naccache, L., & Dehaene, S. (2011) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1117807108 · Cited by 560
Newborn infants detect the beat in music
Winkler, I., Háden, G. P., Ladinig, O., Sziller, I., & Honing, H. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0809035106 · Cited by 599
Self-citationModeling the auditory scene: predictive regularity representations and perceptual objects
Winkler, I., Denham, S. L., & Nelken, I. (2009) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2009.09.003 · Cited by 559
Self-citationA neuronal model of predictive coding accounting for the mismatch negativity.
Wacongne, C., Changeux, J.-P., & Dehaene, S. (2012) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.5003-11.2012 · Cited by 542
Metadata
- Authors
- Winkler, I.
- Venue
- Journal of Psychophysiology
- Publisher
- Hogrefe Publishing Group
- Published
- 2007-01
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 3-4
- Pages
- 147-163
- ISSN
- 0269-8803 (ISSN-L)
- 2151-2124
- OpenAlex
- W2161996678
- Cited by
- 568
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 11.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Interpreting the Mismatch Negativity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1027/0269-8803.21.34.147
- The paper
- Winkler, I. (2007). Interpreting the Mismatch Negativity. Journal of Psychophysiology. https://doi.org/10.1027/0269-8803.21.34.147
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.