The brain function of prediction is fundamental for human beings to shape perceptions efficiently and successively. Through decades of effort, a valuable brain activation map has been obtained for prediction. However, much less is known about how the brain manages the prediction process over time using traditional neuropsychological paradigms. Here, we implemented an innovative paradigm for timing prediction to precisely study the temporal dynamics of neural oscillations. In the experiment recruiting 45 participants, expectation suppression was found for the overall electroencephalographic activity, consistent with previous hemodynamic studies. Notably, we found that N1 was positively associated with predictability while N2 showed a reversed relation to predictability. Furthermore, the matching prediction had a similar profile with no timing prediction, both showing an almost saturated N1 and an absence of N2. The results indicate that the N1 process showed a ‘sharpening’ effect for predictable inputs, while the N2 process showed a ‘dampening’ effect. Therefore, these two paradoxical neural effects of prediction, which have provoked wide confusion in accounting for expectation suppression, actually co-exist in the procedure of timing prediction but work in separate time windows. These findings strongly support a recently-proposed opposing process theory.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Egner T, Monti JM, Summerfield C. Expectation and surprise determine neural population responses in the ventral visual stream. J Neurosci 2010, 30: 16601–16608.
Clark A. Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behav Brain Sci 2013, 36: 181–204.
de Lange FP, Heilbron M, Kok P. How do expectations shape perception? Trends Cogn Sci 2018, 22: 764–779.
Adams RA, Shipp S, Friston KJ. Predictions not commands: active inference in the motor system. Brain Struct Funct 2013, 218: 611–643.
Cope TE, Sohoglu E, Sedley W, Patterson K, Jones PS, Wiggins J, et al. Evidence for causal top-down frontal contributions to predictive processes in speech perception. Nat Commun 2017, 8: 2154.
Pine A, Sadeh N, Ben-Yakov A, Dudai Y, Mendelsohn A. Knowledge acquisition is governed by striatal prediction errors. Nat Commun 2018, 9: 1673.
Summerfield C, de Lange FP. Expectation in perceptual decision making: neural and computational mechanisms. Nat Rev Neurosci 2014, 15: 745–756.
Sun H, Ma X, Tang L, Han J, Zhao Y, Xu X, et al. Modulation of beta oscillations for implicit motor timing in primate sensorimotor cortex during movement preparation. Neurosci Bull 2019, 35: 826–840.
Rao RPN, Ballard DHJNN. Predictive coding in the visual cortex: a functional interpretation of some extra-classical receptive-field effects. Nat Neurosci 1999, 2: 79–87.
Friston K. A theory of cortical responses. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2005, 360: 815–836.
Friston K. The free-energy principle: a unified brain theory? Nat Rev Neurosci 2010, 11: 127–138.
Alink A, Schwiedrzik CM, Kohler A, Singer W, Muckli L. Stimulus predictability reduces responses in primary visual cortex. J Neurosci 2010, 30: 2960–2966.
Barne LC, Claessens PME, Reyes MB, Caetano MS, Cravo AM. Low-frequency cortical oscillations are modulated by temporal prediction and temporal error coding. Neuroimage 2017, 146: 40–46.
Blank H, Davis MH. Prediction errors but not sharpened signals simulate multivoxel fMRI patterns during speech perception. PLoS Biol 2016, 14: e1002577.
Ullsperger M, Fischer AG, Nigbur R, Endrass T. Neural mechanisms and temporal dynamics of performance monitoring. Trends Cogn Sci 2014, 18: 259–267.
Richter D, Ekman M, Lange FPDJJoN. Suppressed sensory response to predictable object stimuli throughout the ventral visual stream. J Neurosci 2018, 38:7452–7461.
Bueti D, Bahrami B, Walsh V, Rees G. Encoding of temporal probabilities in the human brain. J Neurosci 2010, 30: 4343–4352.
Doherty JR, Rao A, Mesulam MM, Nobre AC. Synergistic effect of combined temporal and spatial expectations on visual attention. J Neurosci 2005, 25: 8259–8266.
Jaramillo S, Zador AM. The auditory cortex mediates the perceptual effects of acoustic temporal expectation. Nat Neurosci 2011, 14: 246–251.
Kok P, Brouwer GJ, van Gerven MA, de Lange FP. Prior expectations bias sensory representations in visual cortex. J Neurosci 2013, 33: 16275–16284.
Kouider S, Long B, Le Stanc L, Charron S, Fievet AC, Barbosa LS, et al. Neural dynamics of prediction and surprise in infants. Nat Commun 2015, 6: 8537.
Kok P, Jehee JF, de Lange FP. Less is more: expectation sharpens representations in the primary visual cortex. Neuron 2012, 75: 265–270.
Kok P, Rahnev D, Jehee JF, Lau HC, de Lange FP. Attention reverses the effect of prediction in silencing sensory signals. Cereb Cortex 2012, 22: 2197–2206.
de Gardelle V, Waszczuk M, Egner T, Summerfield C. Concurrent repetition enhancement and suppression responses in extrastriate visual cortex. Cereb Cortex 2013, 23: 2235–2244.
de Gardelle V, Stokes M, Johnen VM, Wyart V, Summerfield C. Overlapping multivoxel patterns for two levels of visual expectation. Front Hum Neurosci 2013, 7: 158.
Miller EK, Desimone R. Parallel neuronal mechanisms for short-term memory. Science 1994, 263: 520–522.
Press C, Kok P, Yon D. The perceptual prediction paradox. Trends Cogn Sci 2020, 24: 13–24.
Ekman M, Kok P, de Lange FP. Time-compressed preplay of anticipated events in human primary visual cortex. Nat Commun 2017, 8: 15276.
Kok P, Mostert P, de Lange FP. Prior expectations induce prestimulus sensory templates. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2017, 114: 10473–10478.
Summerfield C, Egner T, Greene M, Koechlin E, Mangels J, Hirsch J. Predictive codes for forthcoming perception in the frontal cortex. Science 2006, 314: 1311–1314.
Bueti D, Lasaponara S, Cercignani M, Macaluso E. Learning about time: plastic changes and interindividual brain differences. Neuron 2012, 75: 725–737.
Arnal LH, Doelling KB, Poeppel D. Delta-beta coupled oscillations underlie temporal prediction accuracy. Cereb Cortex 2015, 25: 3077–3085.
Stefanics G, Hangya B, Hernadi I, Winkler I, Lakatos P, Ulbert I. Phase entrainment of human delta oscillations can mediate the effects of expectation on reaction speed. J Neurosci 2010, 30: 13578–13585.
Summerfield C, Koechlin E. A neural representation of prior information during perceptual inference. Neuron 2008, 59: 336–347.
Calderone DJ, Lakatos P, Butler PD, Castellanos FX. Entrainment of neural oscillations as a modifiable substrate of attention. Trends Cogn Sci 2014, 18: 300–309.
Lakatos P, Karmos G, Mehta AD, Ulbert I, Schroeder CE. Entrainment of neuronal oscillations as a mechanism of attentional selection. Science 2008, 320: 110–113.
Melloni L, Schwiedrzik CM, Muller N, Rodriguez E, Singer W. Expectations change the signatures and timing of electrophysiological correlates of perceptual awareness. J Neurosci 2011, 31: 1386–1396.
Delorme A, Makeig S. EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. J Neurosci Methods 2004, 134: 9–21.
Folstein JR, Van PCJP. Influence of cognitive control and mismatch on the N2 component of the ERP: a review. Psychophysiology 2008, 45: 152–170.
Brunia CHM, Damen EJP. Distribution of slow brain potentials related to motor preparation and stimulus anticipation in a time estimation task. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1988, 69: 234–243.
Luck SJ, Kappenman ES (Eds). The Oxford Handbook of Event-Related Potential Components. Oxford Library of Psychology 2008.
Stahl J, Gibbons HJP. The application of jackknife-based onset detection of lateralized readiness potential in correlative approaches. Psychophysiology 2004, 41: 845–860.
Miller J, Patterson AT, Ulrichb R. Jackknife-based method for measuring LRP onset latency differences. Psychophysiology 1998, 35: 99–115.
Summerfield C, Egner T. Expectation (and attention) in visual cognition. Trends Cogn Sci 2009, 13: 403–409.
Nobre AC, van Ede F. Anticipated moments: temporal structure in attention. Nat Rev Neurosci 2018, 19: 34–48.
Buhusi CV, Meck WH. What makes us tick? Functional and neural mechanisms of interval timing. Nat Rev Neurosci 2005, 6: 755–765.
Hillyard SA, Anllo-Vento L. Event-related brain potentials in the study of visual selective attention. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1998, 95: 781–787.
Stormer VS, McDonald JJ, Hillyard SA. Cross-modal cueing of attention alters appearance and early cortical processing of visual stimuli. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2009, 106: 22456–22461.
Arnal LH, Giraud AL. Cortical oscillations and sensory predictions. Trends Cogn Sci 2012, 16: 390–398.
Capilla A, Schoffelen JM, Paterson G, Thut G, Gross J. Dissociated alpha-band modulations in the dorsal and ventral visual pathways in visuospatial attention and perception. Cereb Cortex 2014, 24: 550–561.
Klimesch W. alpha-band oscillations, attention, and controlled access to stored information. Trends Cogn Sci 2012, 16: 606–617.
Cravo AM, Rohenkohl G, Wyart V, Nobre AC. Endogenous modulation of low frequency oscillations by temporal expectations. J Neurophysiol 2011, 106: 2964–2972.
van Rijn H, Kononowicz TW, Meck WH, Ng KK, Penney TB. Contingent negative variation and its relation to time estimation: a theoretical evaluation. Front Integr Neurosci 2011, 5: 91.
Kononowicz TW, van Rijn H. Decoupling interval timing and climbing neural activity: a dissociation between CNV and N1P2 amplitudes. J Neurosci 2014, 34: 2931–2939.
Ni B, Wu R, Yu T, Zhu H, Li Y, Liu Z. Role of the hippocampus in distinct memory traces: timing of match and mismatch enhancement revealed by intracranial recording. Neurosci Bull 2017, 33: 664–674.
Mangun GR, Hillyard SA. Modulations of sensory-evoked brain potentials indicate changes in perceptual processing during visual-spatial priming. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 1991, 17: 1057–1074.
Summerfield C, Trittschuh EH, Monti JM, Mesulam MM, Egner T. Neural repetition suppression reflects fulfilled perceptual expectations. Nat Neurosci 2008, 11: 1004–1006.
Chalk M, Marre O, Tkacik G. Toward a unified theory of efficient, predictive, and sparse coding. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2018, 115: 186–191.
This work was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2017YFB1300302), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81925020 and 61976152), and the Young Elite Scientist Sponsorship Program of the China Association for Science and Technology (2018QNRC001).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
About this article
Cite this article
Xu, M., Meng, J., Yu, H. et al. Dynamic Brain Responses Modulated by Precise Timing Prediction in an Opposing Process. Neurosci. Bull. 37, 70–80 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12264-020-00527-1
- Expectation suppression
- Predictive coding
- Event-related potentials
- Timing prediction