↓ Skip to main content

Active inference, sensory attenuation and illusions

Overview of attention for article published in Cognitive Processing, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#26 of 351)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
15 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
510 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Active inference, sensory attenuation and illusions
Published in
Cognitive Processing, June 2013
DOI 10.1007/s10339-013-0571-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Harriet Brown, Rick A. Adams, Isabel Parees, Mark Edwards, Karl Friston

Abstract

Active inference provides a simple and neurobiologically plausible account of how action and perception are coupled in producing (Bayes) optimal behaviour. This can be seen most easily as minimising prediction error: we can either change our predictions to explain sensory input through perception. Alternatively, we can actively change sensory input to fulfil our predictions. In active inference, this action is mediated by classical reflex arcs that minimise proprioceptive prediction error created by descending proprioceptive predictions. However, this creates a conflict between action and perception; in that, self-generated movements require predictions to override the sensory evidence that one is not actually moving. However, ignoring sensory evidence means that externally generated sensations will not be perceived. Conversely, attending to (proprioceptive and somatosensory) sensations enables the detection of externally generated events but precludes generation of actions. This conflict can be resolved by attenuating the precision of sensory evidence during movement or, equivalently, attending away from the consequences of self-made acts. We propose that this Bayes optimal withdrawal of precise sensory evidence during movement is the cause of psychophysical sensory attenuation. Furthermore, it explains the force-matching illusion and reproduces empirical results almost exactly. Finally, if attenuation is removed, the force-matching illusion disappears and false (delusional) inferences about agency emerge. This is important, given the negative correlation between sensory attenuation and delusional beliefs in normal subjects--and the reduction in the magnitude of the illusion in schizophrenia. Active inference therefore links the neuromodulatory optimisation of precision to sensory attenuation and illusory phenomena during the attribution of agency in normal subjects. It also provides a functional account of deficits in syndromes characterised by false inference and impaired movement--like schizophrenia and Parkinsonism--syndromes that implicate abnormal modulatory neurotransmission.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 510 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 <1%
Germany 3 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 492 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 105 21%
Student > Master 89 17%
Researcher 77 15%
Student > Bachelor 37 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 28 5%
Other 94 18%
Unknown 80 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 148 29%
Neuroscience 89 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 35 7%
Computer Science 26 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 5%
Other 77 15%
Unknown 110 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 01 February 2023.
All research outputs
#1,697,777
of 24,791,202 outputs
Outputs from Cognitive Processing
#26
of 351 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,010
of 202,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cognitive Processing
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,791,202 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 351 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 202,377 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.