Cited by 175Embodied and Extended CognitionNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies

Recent advances in the application of predictive coding and active inference models within clinical neuroscience

Open access
Smith, Ryan, Badcock, Paul, Friston, Karl J.·2021·Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences

Abstract

Research in clinical neuroscience is founded on the idea that a better understanding of brain (dys)function will improve our ability to diagnose and treat neurological and psychiatric disorders. In recent years, neuroscience has converged on the notion that the brain is a 'prediction machine,' in that it actively predicts the sensory input that it will receive if one or another course of action is chosen. These predictions are used to select actions that will (most often, and in the long run) maintain the body within the narrow range of physiological states consistent with survival. This insight has given rise to an area of clinical computational neuroscience research that focuses on characterizing neural circuit architectures that can accomplish these predictive functions, and on how the associated processes may break down or become aberrant within clinical conditions. Here, we provide a brief review of examples of recent work on the application of predictive processing models of brain function to study clinical (psychiatric) disorders, with the aim of highlighting current directions and their potential clinical utility. We offer examples of recent conceptual models, formal mathematical models, and applications of such models in empirical research in clinical populations, with a focus on making this material accessible to clinicians without expertise in computational neuroscience. In doing so, we aim to highlight the potential insights and opportunities that understanding the brain as a prediction machine may offer to clinical research and practice.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/pcn.13138

Cites

124 of 124 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Characteristic behaviours across disorders (such as avoidance in anxiety, compulsions in OCD, or social withdrawal in depression) can be understood as policies that initially reduce volatility or prediction error but become maladaptive when they reinforce overly precise priors or limit access to corrective evidence.

    “This means that characteristic behaviours across disorder (such as avoidance in anxiety, compulsions in OCD, or social withdrawal in depression) can be understood as policies that initially reduce volatility or prediction error but become maladaptive when they reinforce overly precise priors or limit access to corrective evidence (51).”

    From Predictive coding and neurocomputational psychiatry: a mechanistic framework for understanding mental disorders (2026) · cites this paper as [51]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Smith R, Schwartenbeck P, Parr T, Friston KJ. An active inference approach to modeling concept learning. bioRxiv. 2019:633677.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Smith, R., Badcock, P., & Friston, K. J.
Affiliations
  • Laureate Institute for Brain Research (US)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • Wellcome Centre for Human Neuroimaging (GB)
Corresponding author
Smith, Ryan
Venue
Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-09-25
Volume
75
Issue
1
Pages
3-13
ISSN
  • 1323-1316 (ISSN-L)
  • 1440-1819
OpenAlex
W3082730045
Cited by
174
References
116
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 13
FWCI
2.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion)
Funders
William K. Warren Foundation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Embodied and Extended Cognition
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
Keywords
predictive processing, active inference, predictive coding, computational psychiatry, neural circuit architecture, mental illness, neurological disorders
MeSH terms
Mental Disorders, Humans, Models, Theoretical, Neurosciences, Computational Biology

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