↓ Skip to main content

P300 amplitude variations, prior probabilities, and likelihoods: A Bayesian ERP study

Overview of attention for article published in Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
Title
P300 amplitude variations, prior probabilities, and likelihoods: A Bayesian ERP study
Published in
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, July 2016
DOI 10.3758/s13415-016-0442-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bruno Kopp, Caroline Seer, Florian Lange, Anouck Kluytmans, Antonio Kolossa, Tim Fingscheidt, Herbert Hoijtink

Abstract

The capability of the human brain for Bayesian inference was assessed by manipulating probabilistic contingencies in an urn-ball task. Event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded in response to stimuli that differed in their relative frequency of occurrence (.18 to .82). A veraged ERPs with sufficient signal-to-noise ratio (relative frequency of occurrence > .5) were used for further analysis. Research hypotheses about relationships between probabilistic contingencies and ERP amplitude variations were formalized as (in-)equality constrained hypotheses. Conducting Bayesian model comparisons, we found that manipulations of prior probabilities and likelihoods were associated with separately modifiable and distinct ERP responses. P3a amplitudes were sensitive to the degree of prior certainty such that higher prior probabilities were related to larger frontally distributed P3a waves. P3b amplitudes were sensitive to the degree of likelihood certainty such that lower likelihoods were associated with larger parietally distributed P3b waves. These ERP data suggest that these antecedents of Bayesian inference (prior probabilities and likelihoods) are coded by the human brain.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Algeria 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 64 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 30%
Student > Master 10 15%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 14 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 37%
Neuroscience 13 19%
Unspecified 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 16 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 July 2016.
All research outputs
#6,570,939
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
#288
of 1,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,687
of 370,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
#4
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,074 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 370,083 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.