Abstract
The human brain is thought to optimise the encoding of incoming sensory information through two principal mechanisms: prediction uses stored information to guide the interpretation of forthcoming sensory events, and attention prioritizes these events according to their behavioural relevance. Despite the ubiquitous contributions of attention and prediction to various aspects of perception and cognition, it remains unknown how they interact to modulate information processing in the brain. A recent extension of predictive coding theory suggests that attention optimises the expected precision of predictions by modulating the synaptic gain of prediction error units. Since prediction errors code for the difference between predictions and sensory signals, this model would suggest that attention increases the selectivity for mismatch information in the neural response to a surprising stimulus. Alternative predictive coding models proposes that attention increases the activity of prediction (or ‘representation’) neurons, and would therefore suggest that attention and prediction synergistically modulate selectivity for feature information in the brain. Here we applied multivariate forward encoding techniques to neural activity recorded via electroencephalography (EEG) as human observers performed a simple visual task, to test for the effect of attention on both mismatch and feature information in the neural response to surprising stimuli. Participants attended or ignored a periodic stream of gratings, the orientations of which could be either predictable, surprising, or unpredictable. We found that surprising stimuli evoked neural responses that were encoded according to the difference between predicted and observed stimulus features, and that attention facilitated the encoding of this type of information in the brain. These findings advance our understanding of how attention and prediction modulate information processing in the brain, and support the theory that attention optimises precision expectations during hierarchical inference by increasing the gain of prediction errors.
Footnotes
This research was supported by the Australian Research Council (ARC) Centre of Excellence for Integrative Brain Function (ARC Centre Grant CE140100007). J.B.M was supported by an ARC Australian Laureate Fellowship (FL110100103). M.I.G. was supported by a University of Queensland Fellowship (2016000071). The authors declare no competing financial interests.