Predicting the unknown: Novelty processing depends on expectations

Fulfilled predictions lead to neural suppression akin to repetition suppression, but it is currently unclear if such effects generalize to broader stimulus categories in the absence of exact expectations. In particular, does expecting novelty alter the way novel stimuli are processed? In the present study, the effects of expectations on novelty processing were investigated using event-related potentials, while controlling for the effect of repetition. Sequences of five stimuli were presented in a continuous way, such that the last stimulus of a 5-stimulus sequence was followed by the first stimulus of a new 5-stimulus sequence without interruption. The 5-stimulus sequence was predictable: the first three stimuli were preceded by a cue indicating that the next stimulus was likely to be a standard stimulus, and the last two by a cue indicating that the next stimulus was likely to be novel. On some trials a cue typically predicting a standard was in fact followed by an unexpected novel stimulus. This design allowed to investigate the independent effects of (violated) expectations and repetition on novelty processing. The initial detection of expected novels was enhanced compared to unexpected novels, as indexed by a larger anterior N2. In contrast, the orienting response, as reflected by a novelty P3, was reduced for expected compared to unexpected novels. Although the novel stimuli were never repeated themselves, they could be presented after one another in the sequence. Such a category repetition affected the processing of novelty, as evidenced by an enhanced anterior N2, and a reduced novelty P3 for novels preceded by other novels. Taken together, the current study shows that novelty processing is influenced by expectations.

[1]  P. O. White,et al.  PROMAX: A QUICK METHOD FOR ROTATION TO OBLIQUE SIMPLE STRUCTURE , 1964 .

[2]  J. Panksepp Affective Neuroscience: The Foundations of Human and Animal Emotions , 1998 .

[3]  R. Knight,et al.  Neural Mechanisms of Involuntary Attention to Acoustic Novelty and Change , 1998, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[4]  I. Winkler,et al.  Involuntary Attention and Distractibility as Evaluated with Event-Related Brain Potentials , 2000, Audiology and Neurotology.

[5]  D. Friedman,et al.  Visual novel stimuli in an ERP novelty oddball paradigm: effects of familiarity on repetition and recognition memory. , 2007, Psychophysiology.

[6]  D. Friedman,et al.  The novelty P3: an event-related brain potential (ERP) sign of the brain's evaluation of novelty , 2001, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[7]  Phillip J. Holcomb,et al.  To Ignore or Explore: TopDown Modulation of Novelty Processing , 2008, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[8]  E. Donchin,et al.  Localization of the event-related potential novelty response as defined by principal components analysis. , 2003, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[9]  Joseph Dien,et al.  The ERP PCA Toolkit: An open source program for advanced statistical analysis of event-related potential data , 2010, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[10]  M. Meeter,et al.  Novelty detection is enhanced when attention is otherwise engaged: an event-related potential study , 2014, Experimental Brain Research.

[11]  Robert J. Barry,et al.  Reinstating the Novelty P3 , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[12]  M. W. Brown,et al.  Differential neuronal encoding of novelty, familiarity and recency in regions of the anterior temporal lobe , 1998, Neuropharmacology.

[13]  M. Meeter,et al.  Short- and long-lasting consequences of novelty, deviance and surprise on brain and cognition , 2015, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[14]  E. Donchin,et al.  The influence of stimulus deviance and novelty on the P300 and novelty P3. , 2002, Psychophysiology.

[15]  K. Carlsson,et al.  Tickling Expectations: Neural Processing in Anticipation of a Sensory Stimulus , 2000, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[16]  E. Courchesne,et al.  Stimulus novelty, task relevance and the visual evoked potential in man. , 1975, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[17]  Jiang Qiu,et al.  The electrophysiological effect of working memory load on involuntary attention in an auditory–visual distraction paradigm: an ERP study , 2010, Experimental Brain Research.

[18]  Phillip J Holcomb,et al.  Surprise? Early visual novelty processing is not modulated by attention. , 2011, Psychophysiology.

[19]  Arnaud Delorme,et al.  EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis , 2004, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[20]  N. Squires,et al.  Two varieties of long-latency positive waves evoked by unpredictable auditory stimuli in man. , 1975, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[21]  Uta Sailer,et al.  Size does matter! Perceptual stimulus properties affect event-related potentials during feedback processing. , 2015, Psychophysiology.

[22]  R. Simons,et al.  On the relationship of P3a and the Novelty-P3 , 2001, Biological Psychology.

[23]  John Polich,et al.  P3a from auditory white noise stimuli , 2006, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[24]  Floris P. de Lange,et al.  Prior expectations induce pre-stimulus sensory templates , 2017, bioRxiv.

[25]  Carles Escera,et al.  Spatiotemporal dynamics of the auditory novelty-P3 event-related brain potential. , 2003, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[26]  C. Tenke,et al.  Optimizing PCA methodology for ERP component identification and measurement: theoretical rationale and empirical evaluation , 2003, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[27]  Allen Azizian,et al.  Beware misleading cues: perceptual similarity modulates the N2/P3 complex. , 2006, Psychophysiology.

[28]  Jonathan R. Folstein,et al.  Influence of cognitive control and mismatch on the N2 component of the ERP: a review. , 2007, Psychophysiology.

[29]  C. Escera,et al.  Electrical responses reveal the temporal dynamics of brain events during involuntary attention switching , 2001, The European journal of neuroscience.

[30]  G. Rainer,et al.  Cognitive neuroscience: Neural mechanisms for detecting and remembering novel events , 2003, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[31]  Joseph Dien,et al.  Applying Principal Components Analysis to Event-Related Potentials: A Tutorial , 2012, Developmental neuropsychology.

[32]  Joseph Dien,et al.  Addressing Misallocation of Variance in Principal Components Analysis of Event-Related Potentials , 2004, Brain Topography.

[33]  C. Summerfield,et al.  Expectation in perceptual decision making: neural and computational mechanisms , 2014, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[34]  J. Horn A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis , 1965, Psychometrika.

[35]  Tim Fingscheidt,et al.  A computational analysis of the neural bases of Bayesian inference , 2015, NeuroImage.

[36]  Joseph Dien,et al.  Evaluation of PCA and ICA of simulated ERPs: Promax vs. infomax rotations , 2007, Human brain mapping.

[37]  L. Balázs,et al.  Stimulus complexity effects on the event-related potentials to task-irrelevant stimuli , 2013, Biological Psychology.

[38]  Steven J. Luck,et al.  ERPLAB: an open-source toolbox for the analysis of event-related potentials , 2014, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[39]  Jim M. Monti,et al.  Neural repetition suppression reflects fulfilled perceptual expectations , 2008, Nature Neuroscience.

[40]  M. Meeter,et al.  Expecting the unexpected: the effects of deviance on novelty processing. , 2014, Behavioral neuroscience.