Voluntary Attention Selectively Modulates Omission Responses.

Overview

1. Leibniz Institute for Neurobiology, Magdeburg, Germany
2. Wilhelm Wundt Institute for Psychology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
3. Magdeburg‐Stendal University of Applied Sciences, Stendal, Germany

Abstract

Predictive coding conceptualizes attention as a weighting of prediction error signals. However, empirical findings on how attention influences common markers of prediction error have been inconsistent, likely because these markers are typically derived from stimulus‐evoked responses. To avoid stimulus‐related confounds and isolate effects related purely to prediction, we investigated how attention modulates brain responses to unexpected stimulus omissions. Using visual–auditory couplings where the auditory stimulus was occasionally omitted, we recorded EEG responses that revealed a multistage omission response—from early sensory to later higher‐level prediction error activity. Voluntary attention was manipulated along two dimensions: (1) toward the visual or auditory modality, and (2) toward the moment of stimulus presentation or sustained over time. Early sensory prediction error, reflected by the omission N1, was unaffected by any manipulation of attention. In contrast, later high‐level prediction error processing, reflected by omission P3 responses, was strongly affected by directing attention: robust responses were elicited when attention was directed to the auditory modality—where the prediction had been violated—but these were markedly reduced or absent when attention was directed to the visual modality. These results suggest an attentional system that does not affect low‐level sensory prediction error but is capable of influencing distinct stages in the processing hierarchy in service of task performance. This first investigation of how attention affects different stages of omission activity suggests that voluntary attention may modulate prediction error processing via specific neurotransmitter systems and demonstrates this approach's potential for reliably studying precision‐weighting in the brain.

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.

Code

The paper links to its data, not to its authors' code: see the Data section.

Tracing map

A tracing map links a paper to the code its authors published: this paper has none, so it has no map.

Data

Datasets cited

• osf:xprbk — at OSF; found in “Data Availability Statement”

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in OSF at https://osf.io/xprbk, reference number https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/XPRBK.

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.

Versions

The history of this record: each version stored by the harvester or made by a correction of its authors or of the maintainers of its code, and what changed in its facts. The texts of the paper (its abstract, its availability statements) are not part of it; versions that changed only those are not listed.

Version 1, 28 September 2026: the first record

Recorded: type, language, journal, volume, issue, pages, dates, 3 authors, 5 keywords, 14 MeSH terms, 1 funder, 69 references.

Cite

This paper

Dercksen, T. T., Widmann, A., & Wetzel, N. (2026). Voluntary Attention Selectively Modulates Omission Responses. Human brain mapping, 47(5), e70518. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.70518

Similar papers

The papers with a page that share the most with this one: the tools found in their code, their categories, datasets, cited references and authors, the rarest counting most.

[1] doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0889-25.2026 [code]

Neural Evidence for Action-Related Somatosensory Predictions.

Journal: The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience

In common: EEG, 9 references

[2] doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0357956 [code]

Early electrophysiological responses reflect precision-weighted prediction errors to face features.

Journal: PloS one

In common: EEG, cognitive, 8 references

[3] doi:10.1002/advs.77857 [code]

Brain Network Dynamics of Local and Global Predictive Processing in Aging.

Journal: Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany)

In common: cognitive, 7 references

[4] doi:10.1111/ejn.70503

Modulation of Predictive Coding in Auditory Paradigms of Varying Complexity in Children With Developmental Language Disorder.

Journal: The European journal of neuroscience

In common: EEG, cognitive, 6 references

[5] doi:10.1038/s41467-026-75662-w [code]

Distinct Roles of Deep and Superficial Cortical Layers in Tone Prediction, Comparison, and Adaptation in Human Auditory Cortices.

Journal: Nature communications

In common: cognitive, 5 references

[6] doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0154-26.2026 [code]

Faster but less precise: expectation enhances response speed while reducing sensory fidelity.

Journal: The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience

In common: EEG, cognitive, 4 references

[7] doi:10.1038/s41467-026-73540-z [code]

Predictive acoustical processing in human cortical layers.

Journal: Nature communications

In common: cognitive, 4 references

[8] doi:10.1038/s41593-026-02345-6 [code]

Human hippocampal ripples tune cortical responses based on predicted uncertainty.

Journal: Nature neuroscience

In common: cognitive, 4 references

[9] doi:10.1111/ejn.70490

Analysis of Task Demand Effects on Visual and Auditory Mismatch Negativity (MMN) Across Autistic and Schizotypal Traits.

Journal: The European journal of neuroscience

In common: EEG, cognitive, 4 references

[10] doi:10.1111/ejn.70576

Enhanced Contour-Deviant Mismatch Negativity and Mnemonic Representations in Older Musicians.

Journal: The European journal of neuroscience

In common: EEG, cognitive, 3 references

Contribute

The authors of this paper can claim it, correct its record and validate its tracing map, and the maintainers of its code (its owner, or a public member of its organization) correct what it says of their repository; anyone signed in can ask for its removal. Every request goes to OSCR's own machine, which answers it; your account page follows them.

Request its removal

To ask OSCR to remove this record, the copies of its authors' scripts or its tracing map, use the removal request page: signed in, you say who you are, what to remove and why, then review and confirm the request. Published rules decide every request (how).

Discussion: questions and error reports about this paper and its code, from signed-in readers and its authors. It opens with sign-in.

Reproductions: reports from readers who ran the authors' code: what they reproduced, with which environment, commit and data. It opens with sign-in.

Activity: what happens around this paper: new versions of its record, its map's validation, discussions and reproductions. It opens with sign-in.