The temporal and spectral characteristics of expectations and prediction errors in pain and thermoception

  1. Andreas Strube  Is a corresponding author
  2. Michael Rose
  3. Sepideh Fazeli
  4. Christian Büchel  Is a corresponding author
  1. University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany

Abstract

In the context of a generative model, such as predictive coding, pain and heat perception can be construed as the integration of expectation and input with their difference denoted as a prediction error. In a previous neuroimaging study (Geuter et al., 2017) we observed an important role of the insula in such a model, but could not establish its temporal aspects. Here we employed electroencephalography to investigate neural representations of predictions and prediction errors in heat and pain processing. Our data show that alpha-to-beta activity was associated with stimulus intensity expectation, followed by a negative modulation of gamma band activity by absolute prediction errors. This is in contrast to prediction errors in visual and auditory perception, which are associated with increased gamma band activity, but is in agreement with observations in working memory and word matching, which show gamma band activity for correct, rather than violated predictions.

Data availability

Data for this study are available on https://osf.io/f2mua/

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Andreas Strube

    Department of Systems Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
    For correspondence
    a.strube@uke.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6545-0366
  2. Michael Rose

    Department of Systems Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Sepideh Fazeli

    Department of Systems Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Christian Büchel

    Department of Systems Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
    For correspondence
    buechel@uke.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1965-906X

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB 289)

  • Christian Büchel

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB TR 169 project B3)

  • Michael Rose

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Human subjects: All volunteers gave their informed consent. The study was approved by the Ethics board of the Hamburg Medical Association (PV4745).

Reviewing Editor

  1. Peter Kok, University College London, United Kingdom

Publication history

  1. Received: September 10, 2020
  2. Accepted: February 16, 2021
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: February 17, 2021 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: March 2, 2021 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2021, Strube et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,471
    Page views
  • 181
    Downloads
  • 4
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Andreas Strube
  2. Michael Rose
  3. Sepideh Fazeli
  4. Christian Büchel
(2021)
The temporal and spectral characteristics of expectations and prediction errors in pain and thermoception
eLife 10:e62809.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.62809

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Jacqueline Katharina Meier et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Stress may shift behavioural control from a goal-directed system that encodes action-outcome relationships to a habitual system that learns stimulus-response associations. Although this shift to habits is highly relevant for stress-related psychopathologies, limitations of existing behavioural paradigms hinder research from answering the fundamental question of whether the stress-induced bias to habits is due to reduced outcome processing or enhanced response processing at the time of stimulus presentation, or both. Here, we used EEG-based multivariate pattern analysis to decode neural outcome representations crucial for goal-directed control, as well as response representations during instrumental learning. We show that stress reduced outcome representations but enhanced response representations. Both were directly associated with a behavioural index of habitual responding. Furthermore, changes in outcome and response representations were uncorrelated, suggesting that these may reflect distinct processes. Our findings indicate that habitual behaviour under stress may be the result of both enhanced stimulus-response processing and diminished outcome processing.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Emmanuelle Bioud et al.
    Research Article

    To decide whether a course of action is worth pursuing, individuals typically weigh its expected costs and benefits. Optimal decision-making relies upon accurate effort cost anticipation, which is generally assumed to be performed independently from goal valuation. In two experiments (n = 46), we challenged this independence principle of standard decision theory. We presented participants with a series of treadmill routes randomly associated to monetary rewards and collected both ‘accept’ versus ‘decline’ decisions and subjective estimates of energetic cost. Behavioural results show that higher monetary prospects led participants to provide higher cost estimates, although reward was independent from effort in our design. Among candidate cognitive explanations, they support a model in which prospective cost assessment is biased by the output of an automatic computation adjusting effort expenditure to goal value. This decision bias might lead people to abandon the pursuit of valuable goals that are in fact not so costly to achieve.