Cited by 24Face Recognition and PerceptionNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesVisual perception and processing mechanisms

Prior probability modulates anticipatory activity in category-specific areas

Open access
Trapp, Sabrina, Lepsien, Jöran, Kotz, Sonja A., Bar, Moshe·2016·Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience

Abstract

Bayesian models are currently a dominant framework for describing human information processing. However, it is not clear yet how major tenets of this framework can be translated to brain processes. In this study, we addressed the neural underpinning of prior probability and its effect on anticipatory activity in category-specific areas. Before fMRI scanning, participants were trained in two behavioral sessions to learn the prior probability and correct order of visual events within a sequence. The events of each sequence included two different presentations of a geometric shape and one picture of either a house or a face, which appeared with either a high or a low likelihood. Each sequence was preceded by a cue that gave participants probabilistic information about which items to expect next. This allowed examining cue-related anticipatory modulation of activity as a function of prior probability in category-specific areas (fusiform face area and parahippocampal place area). Our findings show that activity in the fusiform face area was higher when faces had a higher prior probability. The finding of a difference between levels of expectations is consistent with graded, probabilistically modulated activity, but the data do not rule out the alternative explanation of a categorical neural response. Importantly, these differences were only visible during anticipation, and vanished at the time of stimulus presentation, calling for a functional distinction when considering the effects of prior probability. Finally, there were no anticipatory effects for houses in the parahippocampal place area, suggesting sensitivity to stimulus material when looking at effects of prediction.

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 · 10.3758/s13415-015-0373-4

Cites

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?

  • PP makes opposite predictions depending on whether activity represents the transmission of sensory predictions (enhanced activity) or the integration of these predictions with bottom-up activity in prediction error units (reduced activity).

    “PP makes opposite predictions depending on whether activity represents the transmission of sensory predictions 49 , 82 , 97 , 114 , 115 (enhanced activity) or the integration of these predictions with bottom‐up activity in prediction error units (reduced activity).”

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 42 · Cited by 24

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [6]6. Bar, M., Aminoff, E., & Schacter, D. (2008). Scenes unseen: The parahippocampal cortex subserves contextual associations, not scenes per se. Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 8539-8544.
  2. [8]8. de Gardelle, V., Waczuzk, M., Egner, T., & Summerfield, C. (2013). Concurrent representations of prediction and prediction error signals in visual cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 23(9), 2235-2244.
  3. [36]36. Summerfield, C., & Koechlin, E. (2008). A neural representation of prior information during perceptual inference. Neuron, 59(2), 336-347.
  4. [42]42. Wyart, V., Nobre, A. C., & Summerfield, C. (2012). Dissociable influ- ences of signal probability and relevance on visual signal detection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(9), 3593-3598.

Authors
Trapp, S., Lepsien, J., Kotz, S. A., & Bar, M.
Affiliations
  • Max Planck Society (DE)
  • Bar-Ilan University (IL)
Corresponding author
Trapp, Sabrina
Venue
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
Published
2015-09-08
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
135-144
ISSN
  • 1530-7026 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-135X
OpenAlex
W1833863727
Cited by
24
References
42
Citations by year
2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2
FWCI
1.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (2268/6-1, DFG-KO 2268/6-1, KO2268/6-1)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
Keywords
prior probability, Bayesian model, anticipatory activity, fusiform face area, parahippocampal place area, probabilistic forecasting, expectations, face perception, place perception
MeSH terms
Brain Mapping, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Photic Stimulation, Probability, Psychomotor Performance, Reaction Time, Visual Cortex, Visual Pathways

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