Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Receiver Operating Characteristic Plot01:15

Receiver Operating Characteristic Plot

431
A ROC (Receiver Operating Characteristic) plot is a graphical tool used to assess the performance of a binary classification model by illustrating the trade-off between sensitivity (true positive rate) and specificity (false positive rate). By plotting sensitivity against 1 - specificity across various threshold settings, the ROC curve shows how well the model distinguishes between classes, with a curve closer to the top-left corner indicating a more accurate model. The area under the ROC curve...
431
Relative Risk01:12

Relative Risk

1.6K
Relative risk (RR) is a statistical measure commonly used in epidemiology to compare the likelihood of a particular event occurring between two groups. This metric is important for evaluating the relationship between exposure to a specific risk factor and the probability of a particular outcome. It plays a crucial role in medical research, public health studies, and risk assessment. Relative risk quantifies how much more (or less) likely an event is to occur in an exposed group compared to an...
1.6K
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing01:13

Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing

516
Hypothesis testing is a fundamental statistical tool that begins with the assumption that the null hypothesis H0 is true. During this process, two types of errors can occur: Type I and Type II. A Type I error refers to the incorrect rejection of a true null hypothesis, while a Type II error involves the failure to reject a false null hypothesis.
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5%...
516
Prediction Intervals01:03

Prediction Intervals

3.0K
The interval estimate of any variable is known as the prediction interval. It helps decide if a point estimate is dependable.
However, the point estimate is most likely not the exact value of the population parameter, but close to it. After calculating point estimates, we construct interval estimates, called confidence intervals or prediction intervals. This prediction interval comprises a range of values unlike the point estimate and is a better predictor of the observed sample value, y. 
3.0K
Hazard Rate01:11

Hazard Rate

348
The hazard rate, also known as the hazard function or failure rate, is a statistical measure used to describe the instantaneous rate at which an event occurs, given that the event has not yet happened. From a probabilistic perspective, it represents the likelihood that a subject will experience the event in a very small time interval, conditional on surviving up to the beginning of that interval. In terms of frequency, the hazard rate can be viewed as the ratio of the number of events to the...
348
Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error01:10

Propagation of Uncertainty from Systematic Error

1.2K
The atomic mass of an element varies due to the relative ratio of its isotopes. A sample's relative proportion of oxygen isotopes influences its average atomic mass. For instance, if we were to measure the atomic mass of oxygen from a sample, the mass would be a weighted average of the isotopic masses of oxygen in that sample. Since a single sample is not likely to perfectly reflect the true atomic mass of oxygen for all the molecules of oxygen on Earth, the mass we obtain from this...
1.2K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Silver bullets and sensory horizons.

The Behavioral and brain sciences·2026
Same author

Examining the relationship between ssVEP and psychophysical measures of contrast sensitivity, grating acuity, and orientation discrimination.

iScience·2026
Same author

Starting a revolution with a refuted model?

The Behavioral and brain sciences·2025
Same author

Object recognition from sparse simulated phosphenes and curved segments.

Vision research·2025
Same author

Dynamics of vision: Grouping takes longer than crowding.

Journal of vision·2025
Same author

Novelty as a drive of human exploration in complex stochastic environments.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2025
Same journal

Lifespan Trajectories of the Brain's Functional Complexity Characterized by Multiscale Sample Entropy.

NeuroImage·2026
Same journal

Pleasant fragrance modulates dyadic social sharing of positive emotion: Sharer-centered socioemotional enhancement effect and its neural couplings.

NeuroImage·2026
Same journal

Altered Functional Hierarchical and Sequential Organization in Individuals with Schizophrenia during Auditory Processing.

NeuroImage·2026
Same journal

Mechanical Deformation Explains Distinct Neuroimaging Patterns and Etiologies in Brain Trauma.

NeuroImage·2026
Same journal

Ventral striatum temporal interference brain stimulation enhances the reward-positivity event-related potential and reduces anxiety.

NeuroImage·2026
Same journal

NeuroHarm‑Kit: An Open‑Source Toolbox for Benchmarking Deep‑Learning Harmonization of Multi‑Site T1‑Weighted MRI.

NeuroImage·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Dec 25, 2025

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.4K

Risk prediction error signaling: A two-component response?

Marc M Lauffs1, Sophie A Geoghan1, Ophélie Favrod1

  • 1Laboratory of Psychophysics, Brain Mind Institute, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Switzerland.

Neuroimage
|April 6, 2020
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Risk learning involves two distinct neural signals, similar to reward processing. An early signal detects stimulus salience, followed by a later signal reflecting risk prediction error, both originating in specific brain regions.

Keywords:
DopamineNoradrenalineNorepinephrineP300P3bReward prediction errorRisk prediction errorSurprise

More Related Videos

Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack
07:31

Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack

Published on: May 15, 2020

7.4K
Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data
04:57

Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data

Published on: October 23, 2020

10.7K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Dec 25, 2025

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
05:37

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model

Published on: September 16, 2022

2.4K
Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack
07:31

Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack

Published on: May 15, 2020

7.4K
Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data
04:57

Establishing a Competing Risk Regression Nomogram Model for Survival Data

Published on: October 23, 2020

10.7K

Area of Science:

  • Neuroscience
  • Cognitive Science
  • Computational Neuroscience

Background:

  • Organisms adapt to uncertain environments using reward-based learning, primarily mediated by the dopaminergic system signaling reward prediction errors.
  • The dopamine response to rewards may involve two components: rapid stimulus detection and a later reward prediction error signal.
  • Error-based learning signals are also implicated in risk processing, but the neural mechanisms remain unclear.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate if risk learning, or surprise-based learning under uncertainty, utilizes a two-component temporal coding scheme similar to the dopaminergic system.
  • To identify the neural correlates and brain regions involved in risk prediction error signaling.

Main Methods:

  • Human high-density electroencephalography (EEG) was employed during a card game task.
  • Analysis focused on identifying distinct temporal components in brain activity related to risk and salience.
  • Source localization techniques were used to pinpoint the origin of neural signals.

Main Results:

  • Risk prediction error is reflected in the amplitude of the P3b component of the EEG signal.
  • An earlier neural component, modulated by stimulus salience, precedes the P3b modulation.
  • Source analyses suggest that both salience and risk prediction error signals originate in the insular, frontal, and temporal cortex.
  • P3b amplitude modulation correlates with pupil size, suggesting a link to locus coeruleus activity.

Conclusions:

  • Risk learning, like reward learning, appears to involve temporally dissociable neural signals.
  • The findings support a two-component model for surprise-based learning under uncertainty.
  • The insular, frontal, and temporal cortex play a key role in processing risk prediction errors.
  • Pupil size may serve as an indirect indicator of locus coeruleus activity during risk processing.