Cited by 202Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesEmbodied and Extended CognitionMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Prediction error associated with the perceptual segmentation of naturalistic events

Open access
Zacks, Jeffrey M., Kurby, Christopher A., Eisenberg, Michelle L., Haroutunian, Nayiri·2011·Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Abstract

Predicting the near future is important for survival and plays a central role in theories of perception, language processing, and learning. Prediction failures may be particularly important for initiating the updating of perceptual and memory systems and, thus, for the subjective experience of events. Here, we asked observers to make predictions about what would happen 5 sec later in a movie of an everyday activity. Those points where prediction was more difficult corresponded with subjective boundaries in the stream of experience. At points of unpredictability, midbrain and striatal regions associated with the phasic release of the neurotransmitter dopamine transiently increased in activity. This activity could provide a global updating signal, cuing other brain systems that a significant new event has begun.

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 · 10.1162/jocn_a_00078

Cites

51 of 51 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?

  • Mismatches between expected and actual outcomes might produce boundaries and later shifts in context, aligning with findings that such mismatches promote segmentation in learning.

    “One possibility is that prediction errors, or discrepancies between expected and actual outcomes, generate event boundaries and ensuing context shifts [38–40], consistent with evidence that prediction errors can drive segmentation in learning [41,42].”

    From Does mental context drift or shift? (2017) · cites this paper as [39]

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zacks, J. M., Kurby, C. A., Eisenberg, M. L., & Haroutunian, N.
Affiliations
Washington University in St. Louis (US)
Corresponding author
Zacks, Jeffrey M.
Venue
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Publisher
MIT Press
Published
2011-12-01
Volume
23
Issue
12
Pages
4057-4066
ISSN
  • 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8898
OpenAlex
W2148606162
Cited by
202
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 6
FWCI
4.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Digital Commons@Becker (Washington University School of Medicine) (submittedVersion)
  • Open Scholarship Institutional Repository (Washington University in St. Louis) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (RO1MH70674)
  • National Institute on Aging (T32AG000030)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01-MH70674, R01MH070674)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Embodied and Extended Cognition
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
prediction error, perceptual segmentation, subjective experience, stream of consciousness, dopamine release, midbrain, striatum, event prediction, memory updating, naturalistic video
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Photic Stimulation, Predictive Value of Tests, Psychomotor Performance, Reaction Time, Visual Perception, Young Adult

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