Expectation generation and its effect on subsequent pain and visual perception

Bayesian accounts of perception, such as predictive processing, suggest that perceptions integrate expectations and sensory experience, and thus assimilate to expected values. Furthermore, more precise expectations should have stronger influences on perception. We tested these hypotheses using a within-subject paradigm with social cues consisting of what participants were told were ratings from 10 prior participants, but which were actually constructed to independently manipulate the cue mean, variance (precision), and skewness independent of the actual stimulus intensity delivered. Forty-five participants reported their expectations regarding the painfulness of thermal stimuli or the visual contrast of flickering checkerboards. In a second session, similar (sham) cues were each followed by either a noxious thermal or a visual stimulus. Perceptions assimilated to cue-based expectations in both modalities, but precision effects were modality-specific: more precise cues enhanced assimilation in visual perception only, while higher uncertainty slightly increased reported pain. fMRI analysis revealed that the cues affected higher-level affective and cognitive systems--including assimilation to the cue mean in the Stimulus Intensity-Independent Pain Signature-1 (SIIPS-1), a neuromarker of endogenous pain processing--and in the nucleus accumbens. There were no predictive cue effects on the Neurological Pain Signature (NPS), a neuromarker of nociceptive pain. Region of interest analyses showed activity consistent with aversive prediction-error-like encoding in the periaqueductal gray during pain perception, but no cue or prediction error-related responses in early perceptual processing systems. Furthermore, behavioral and computational models of the expectation session revealed that expectations construction was biased towards extreme cue values in both modalities, and towards low-pain cues specifically. These findings suggest that predictive processing theories should be extended with mechanisms such as selective attention to outliers, and that expectation generation and its perceptual effects vary by sensory modality and primarily influence higher-level processes rather than early perception, at least when cues are not reinforced.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS Computational Biology
Published
2025-05-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1013053
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Pain Management and Placebo Effect
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.43

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Expectation generation and its effect on subsequent pain and visual perception

Tor Dessart Wager, Rotem Botvinik‐Nezer, Stephan Geuter, Martin A Lindquist
1 citations
PLoS Computational Biology
Pain Management and Placebo Effect
1.43
article

Expectation generation and its effect on subsequent pain and visual perception

Tor Dessart Wager, Rotem Botvinik‐Nezer, Stephan Geuter, Martin A Lindquist
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Bayesian accounts of perception, such as predictive processing, suggest that perceptions integrate expectations and sensory experience, and thus assimilate to expected values. Furthermore, more precise expectations should have stronger influences on perception. We tested these hypotheses using a within-subject paradigm with social cues consisting of what participants were told were ratings from 10 prior participants, but which were actually constructed to independently manipulate the cue mean, variance (precision), and skewness independent of the actual stimulus intensity delivered. Forty-five participants reported their expectations regarding the painfulness of thermal stimuli or the visual contrast of flickering checkerboards. In a second session, similar (sham) cues were each followed by either a noxious thermal or a visual stimulus. Perceptions assimilated to cue-based expectations in both modalities, but precision effects were modality-specific: more precise cues enhanced assimilation in visual perception only, while higher uncertainty slightly increased reported pain. fMRI analysis revealed that the cues affected higher-level affective and cognitive systems--including assimilation to the cue mean in the Stimulus Intensity-Independent Pain Signature-1 (SIIPS-1), a neuromarker of endogenous pain processing--and in the nucleus accumbens. There were no predictive cue effects on the Neurological Pain Signature (NPS), a neuromarker of nociceptive pain. Region of interest analyses showed activity consistent with aversive prediction-error-like encoding in the periaqueductal gray during pain perception, but no cue or prediction error-related responses in early perceptual processing systems. Furthermore, behavioral and computational models of the expectation session revealed that expectations construction was biased towards extreme cue values in both modalities, and towards low-pain cues specifically. These findings suggest that predictive processing theories should be extended with mechanisms such as selective attention to outliers, and that expectation generation and its perceptual effects vary by sensory modality and primarily influence higher-level processes rather than early perception, at least when cues are not reinforced.

PLoS Computational BiologyVol. 21(5)
Dartmouth College (US), Johns Hopkins University (US), Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
National Institute of Mental Health
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Pain Management and Placebo Effect
1.43
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.