# Predicted Sensory Modality Determines the Timing and Topographies of Omitted Stimulus Potentials

## TL;DR

The brain's predictions about upcoming sensory events influence neural responses to unexpected omissions, with differences in timing and brain activity patterns depending on the expected sense.

## Contribution

This study shows that predictions about the sensory modality of upcoming stimuli lead to modality-specific neural responses to omissions.

## Key findings

- Auditory omitted stimulus potentials (OSPs) had shorter peak latencies than visual OSPs.
- Auditory and visual OSPs showed distinct scalp topographies, with auditory OSPs more anterior and central.
- Omissions were preceded equally by either modality, controlling for prior stimulus effects.

## Abstract

It is thought that our brains actively predict what will happen next in the environment, but it remains unclear how specific the prediction of an upcoming event is. This study investigated whether the prediction about the sensory modality of the upcoming stimulus modulates neural responses to unexpected omissions of stimuli. Previous research has reported that the peak latencies of omitted stimulus potentials (OSPs) are shorter in the auditory modality than in the visual modality when tested in separate blocks. In this study, we presented auditory and visual stimuli in a fixed alternating pattern to examine whether modality‐specific OSPs occur even within a single block. Participants (N = 33) were asked to press a mouse button at a constant interval of 1 s. Each button press triggered either an auditory or visual stimulus, and these were presented twice in an alternating pattern (A, A, V, V, A, A, etc.). The stimuli were omitted in 12% of the trials. This method ensured each type of omission (of either auditory or visual stimuli) to be preceded equally often by either an auditory or a visual stimulus, thereby controlling for late event‐related potential components of the preceding stimulus, if any. The results showed that auditory OSPs had shorter peak latencies than visual OSPs and that their scalp topographies differed; auditory OSPs had more anterior and central distributions than visual OSPs. These findings suggest that OSPs occur in a modality‐specific manner according to the predicted sensory modality of the upcoming stimulus.

To investigate the specificity of the brain's sensory prediction process, neural responses to unexpected stimulus omissions were recorded in a task in which an auditory or visual stimulus was alternately presented twice by the participant's button press. Infrequently omitted stimuli elicited omitted stimulus potentials (OSPs) with different peak latency and scalp topography depending on the expected stimulus modality. The results suggest that predictions are modality‐specific, and such specific predictions are reflected in qualitatively different OSPs.