Back

Event-related potential signatures of auditory predictive processing in first-episode psychosis: a passive pattern-based study

Munoz-Caracuel, M.; Munoz, V.; Angulo, B.; Ruiz-Martinez, F. J.; Perona-Garcelan, S.; Garrido, M. I.; Romero-Garcia, R.; Vazquez Morejon, A. J.; Crespo-Facorro, B.; Gomez, C. M.

2026-10-20 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.64898/2026.10.19.26365874 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Predictive-processing accounts propose altered prediction-error signaling in psychosis. However, event-related potential (ERP) findings in first-episode psychosis (FEP) are inconsistent and focused predominantly on mismatch negativity (MMN). Examining anticipatory and later post-stimulus ERP responses alongside MMN within a single passive paradigm may broaden the assessment of predictive processing in FEP. Methods: 34 participants with non-affective FEP and 34 healthy controls (HC) underwent EEG during a passive auditory pattern-based paradigm. Mean amplitudes of contingent negative variation (CNV), MMN, and post-imperative negative variation (PINV) were quantified at five frontocentral electrodes. Exploratory analyses examined N1 and P2 mean amplitudes. Mixed models tested group, electrode, and group-by- electrode effects adjusting for age, sex and years of education. Regressions examined ERP associations with psychotic-like experiences, neurocognition, and social cognition across groups, and with symptoms, functioning, and antipsychotic dose within FEP. Results: FEP participants reported more psychotic-like experiences and showed poorer global and social cognition than HC (all p-FDR [≤] .042). Standardized adjusted FEP-HC differences at FCz were nonsignificant for CNV ({beta} = -0.46), MMN ({beta} = -0.30), and PINV ({beta} = -0.10; all p-FDR [≥] .265). Exploratory analyses identified lower P2 amplitude in FEP at FCz ({beta} = -0.73; p-FDR = .019) and in the averaged frontocentral ROI ({beta} = -0.64; p-FDR = .027). No ERP-phenotype associations survived FDR correction. Conclusions: Despite phenotypic differences between FEP and HC, no significant differences emerged in the primary ERP indices of predictive processing examined. The exploratory P2 finding and its possible relationship to predictive processing and frontal dysfunction in FEP warrant further investigation.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.