Can predictive coding explain repetition suppression?

Grotheer, Mareike; Kovács, Gyula

doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2015.11.027

Cited by 93 publications

(90 citation statements)

References 124 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While prior studies typically connected RS to local or entirely bottom-up mechanisms, such as fatigue, sharpening, or response facilitation (for a review see Grill-Spector et al 2006), recent studies emphasized the role of top-down factors, such as predictions and expectations (Summerfield et al 2008). Although current single-cell recording results suggest that a simple fatigue-related adaptation of the firing rate is, indeed, unable to explain RS related phenomena (Vogels 2016), the role of top-down effects is currently under heavy debate (for reviews see Auksztulewicz and Friston 2016;Grotheer and Kovács 2016;Kovács and Vogels 2014). The few available human neurochemical studies suggest the role of gamma-aminobutyricacid and acetylcholine in modulating neural responses during stimulus repetitions (for a review see Bunzeck and Thiel 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship between repetition suppression and face perception

Hermann

Grotheer

Kovács

et al. 2016

Brain Imaging and Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship between repetition suppression and face perception

Hermann

Grotheer

Kovács

et al. 2016

Brain Imaging and Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The first face of a trial may induce the prediction of its own repetition in an exemplar-specific fashion, resulting in neural suppression when this prediction is fulfilled, but RS could also result from predictions about the event type (repetition or alternation). Recent studies indeed show that brain responses to the most likely event type are overall suppressed, orthogonally to repetition or alternation effects 24, 28 . Hence, studies investigating repetition probability effects on RS do not unambiguously show the existence of exemplar-specific predictions in the FFA, and whether this region codes for predictions about individual face exemplars is still an open empirical issue.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…In line with this view, a number of recent brain imaging studies have shown that RS is modulated by repetition probability, with greater RS when repetitions are more likely 14–19 , although the conditions of occurrence of this modulation is still a matter of investigation 20–23 . Interestingly, the predictive coding framework might encompass the local adaptation accounts 24 , if one assumes that local adaptation is a specific implementation of one particular prediction: the prediction that stimuli would repeat in our environment. This prediction would result in suppressed responses to repeated inputs through predictive mechanisms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unsuppressible Repetition Suppression and exemplar-specific Expectation Suppression in the Fusiform Face Area

Pajani

Kouider

Roux

et al. 2017

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent work casts Repetition Suppression (RS), i.e. the reduced neural response to repeated stimuli, as the consequence of reduced surprise for repeated inputs. This research, along with other studies documenting Expectation Suppression, i.e. reduced responses to expected stimuli, emphasizes the role of expectations and predictive codes in perception. Here, we use fMRI to further characterize the nature of predictive signals in the human brain. Prior to scanning, participants were implicitly exposed to associations within face pairs. Critically, we found that this resulted in exemplar-specific Expectation Suppression in the fusiform face-sensitive area (FFA): individual faces that could be predicted from the associations elicited reduced FFA responses, as compared to unpredictable faces. Thus, predictive signals in the FFA are specific to face exemplars, and not only generic to the category of face stimuli. In addition, we show that under such circumstances, the occurrence of surprising repetitions did not trigger enhanced brain responses, as had been recently hypothesized, but still suppressed responses, suggesting that repetition suppression might be partly ‘unsuppressible’. Repetition effects cannot be fully modulated by expectations, which supports the recent view that expectation and repetition effects rest on partially independent mechanisms. Altogether, our study sheds light on the nature of expectation signals along the perceptual system.

show abstract

“…Summerfield et al (2008) showed that RS is attenuated when repetitions become less predictable, and suggested that the effect may be linked to the process of prediction error minimization. Hereafter, several modulating factors of this interaction between RS and predictive processing have been identified (for a review see Grotheer and Kovács, 2016). …”

Section: Predictive Brainmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting Affective Information – An Evaluation of Repetition Suppression Effects

Trapp

Kotz

2016

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Both theoretical proposals and empirical studies suggest that the brain interprets sensory input based on expectations to mitigate computational burden. However, as social beings, much of sensory input is affectively loaded – e.g., the smile of a partner, the critical voice of a boss, or the welcoming gesture of a friend. Given that affective information is highly complex and often ambiguous, building up expectations of upcoming affective sensory input may greatly contribute to its rapid and efficient processing. This review points to the role of affective information in the context of the ‘predictive brain’. It particularly focuses on repetition suppression (RS) effects that have recently been linked to prediction processes. The findings are interpreted as evidence for more pronounced prediction processes with affective material. Importantly, it is argued that bottom-up attention inflates the neural RS effect, and because affective stimuli tend to attract more bottom-up attention, it thereby particularly overshadows the magnitude of RS effects for this information. Finally, anxiety disorders, such as social phobia, are briefly discussed as manifestations of modulations in affective prediction.

show abstract

Can predictive coding explain repetition suppression?

Cited by 93 publications

References 124 publications

The relationship between repetition suppression and face perception

The relationship between repetition suppression and face perception

Unsuppressible Repetition Suppression and exemplar-specific Expectation Suppression in the Fusiform Face Area

Predicting Affective Information – An Evaluation of Repetition Suppression Effects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About