ABSTRACT
The placebo and nocebo effects highlight the importance of expectations in modulating pain perception, but in everyday life we don’t need an external source of information to form expectations about pain. The brain can learn to predict pain in a more fundamental way, simply by experiencing fluctuating, non-random streams of noxious inputs, and extracting their temporal regularities. This process is called statistical learning. Here we address a key open question: does statistical learning modulate pain perception? We asked 27 participants to both rate and predict pain intensity levels in sequences of fluctuating heat pain. Using a computational approach, we show that probabilistic expectations and confidence were used to weight pain perception and prediction. As such, this study goes beyond well-established conditioning paradigms associating non-pain cues with pain outcomes, and shows that statistical learning itself shapes pain experience. This finding opens a new path of research into the brain mechanisms of pain regulation, with relevance to chronic pain where it may be dysfunctional.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The study was funded by a MRC Career Development Award to FM (MR/T010614/1) and a UKRI Advanced846 Pain Discovery Platform grant to both F.M. and B.S. (MR/W027593/1). B.S. was also funded by Wellcome (214251/Z/18/Z), Versus Arthritis (21537), and IITP (MSIT 2019-0-01371). This work has been performed using resources provided by the Cambridge Tier-2 system operated by the University of Cambridge Research Computing Service (www.hpc.cam.ac.uk) funded by EPSRC Tier-2 capital grant (EP/T022159/1). HPC access was additionally funded by an EPSRC research infrastructure grant to F.M.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Department of Engineering, University Cambridge Ethics Committee gave ethical approval for this work.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
- We clarified our modelling choices in the Modelling strategy subsection of the results section. - We restructured introduction, results and parts of the methods - We have visualised the experimental design in Figure 1D. Furthermore, we have visualised the two main computational models (eRL and eKF) in Figure 2 - We re-plotted Figure 1E-F with a different exemplary participant, whose rating go above the pain threshold. We also included all participant pain perception and prediction ratings, noxious input sequences and confidence ratings in the supplement in Figures S1-S3. - We elaborated on the significance statements in the Modelling Results subsection and Discussion - We increased the number of simulations per model pair to ≈ 100 (after rejecting fits based on diagnostics criteria - E-BFMI and divergent transitions) and updated the confusion matrix (Table S4). - We included parameter recovery scatter plots for each model and paramter in the Supplement Figures S7-S11 - We have considered the suggested diagnostics and include bulk and tail ESS values for each condition, model, parameter in the Supplement Tables S6-S9. We also report number of chain with low E-BFMI (0), number of divergent transitions (0) and the E-BFMI values per chain in Table S10
Data Availability
All code and data will be available open source, released upon acceptance of the paper in a peer-reviewed journal.
