Susceptibility to auditory hallucinations is associated with spontaneous but not directed modulation of top-down expectations for speech.

Auditory verbal hallucinations (AVHs)-or hearing voices-occur in clinical and non-clinical populations, but their mechanisms remain unclear. Predictive processing models of psychosis have proposed that hallucinations arise from an over-weighting of prior expectations in perception. It is unknown, however, whether this reflects (i) a sensitivity to explicit modulation of prior knowledge or (ii) a pre-existing tendency to spontaneously use such knowledge in ambiguous contexts. Four experiments were conducted to examine this question in healthy participants listening to ambiguous speech stimuli. In experiments 1a (n = 60) and 1b (n = 60), participants discriminated intelligible and unintelligible sine-wave speech before and after exposure to the original language templates (i.e. a modulation of expectation). No relationship was observed between top-down modulation and two common measures of hallucination-proneness. Experiment 2 (n = 99) confirmed this pattern with a different stimulus-sine-vocoded speech (SVS)-that was designed to minimize ceiling effects in discrimination and more closely model previous top-down effects reported in psychosis. In Experiment 3 (n = 134), participants were exposed to SVS without prior knowledge that it contained speech (i.e. naïve listening). AVH-proneness significantly predicted both pre-exposure identification of speech and successful recall for words hidden in SVS, indicating that participants could actually decode the hidden signal spontaneously. Altogether, these findings support a pre-existing tendency to spontaneously draw upon prior knowledge in healthy people prone to AVH, rather than a sensitivity to temporary modulations of expectation. We propose a model of clinical and non-clinical hallucinations, across auditory and visual modalities, with testable predictions for future research.

A Robust Neural Index of High Face Familiarity.

Humans are remarkably accurate at recognizing familiar faces, whereas their ability to recognize, or even match, unfamiliar faces is much poorer. However, previous research has failed to identify neural correlates of this striking behavioral difference. Here, we found a clear difference in brain potentials elicited by highly familiar faces versus unfamiliar faces. This effect starts 200 ms after stimulus onset and reaches its maximum at 400 to 600 ms. This sustained-familiarity effect was substantially larger than previous candidates for a neural familiarity marker and was detected in almost all participants, representing a reliable index of high familiarity. Whereas its scalp distribution was consistent with a generator in the ventral visual pathway, its modulation by repetition and degree of familiarity suggests an integration of affective and visual information.