Wen WEN, Atsushi YAMASHITA, Hajime ASAMA

The University of Tokyo

OR25-32-4

A subjective feeling of control over the external events through one’s behavior or will.

I did it!

2

Comparison of action and effect / Perceptual processes

Reconstructive accounts / High-level cognitive processes

Goal State

Motor Commands

Motor Commands

Actual Sensory Feedback

ComparisonSense of Agency

[Frith et al., 2000]

Prediction

3

The process of focusing one’s consciousness on specific stimuli or processes

Attention matters integration of distinct information.

The present study focused on 3 aspects of attention: attentional resource (limited), arousal, and attentional allocation (selective).

[Schneider & Shiffrin, 1977]

4

Study 1: Influence of divided attention (attentional resource) on sense of agency

Study 2: Influence of arousal on agency judgment and intentional binding effect

Study 3: Influence of attentional allocation: Goal-directed vs. perceptual level

5

A dual task paradigm

+ 392

or

3298192Rate the extent

of control

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9Not at all Very much

Enter the digit string

OK

Time

500 ms3 s

10 sUntil response

Until response

Experimental design

Attentional load: Low vs. high

Delay in response: 100, 400, and 700 ms

Goal of controlling: No-goal vs. goal-directed

6

No-goal condition

Action-effect comparison process dominated.

Goal-directed condition

Performance-based inference dominated.

** n.s.

The action-effect comparison process underlying sense of agency requires attention. The performance-based inference underlying sense of agency was probably automatic.

Wen W, Yamashita A, Asama H (2016) Divided attention and processes underlying sense of agency. Front Psychol 7:35.

7

Color (red vs. black) of the target was used to vary arousal.

The binding effect reflects an implicit aspect of the sense of agency.

+

Target

Agency rating

1-9

Estimation of

interval

0-1000 ms

or

Time

Experimental design

Arousal: High (red) vs. low (black)

Delay in response: 0, 100, 200, 300, 500, 700, or 1000 ms

Task

Agency rating

Action-effect interval estimation (the intentional binding effect)

8

Agency rating gradually decreased with increases in action-outcome delay.

The binding effect increased in the longer delay conditions, and was enhanced by arousal.

Wen W, Yamashita A, Asama H (2015) The influence of action-outcome delay and arousal on sense of agency and the intentional binding effect. Conscious Cogn 36:87–95.

9

Focusing on a goal (A) vs. focusing on perceptual process (action-effect interval, B)

Task: Directing a moving dot into a destination as soon as possible

To what extent was

the dot under your

control?

1–9

Experimental design

Delay in response

Assistance: Ignoring erroneous commands (disturb perceptual process but improve performance)

10

When the participants focused on goal-achievement, their sense of agency increased with the assistance of computer, although a large proportion of their commands were ignored.

Action-effect comparison

Performance-based inference

Integration Sense of agency

Dominate

11

Wen W, Yamashita A, Asama H (2015) The sense of agency during continuous action: Performance is more important than action-feedback association. PLoS One 10(4):e0125226.

When the participants were instructed to detected delay between their commands and the response of the moving dot, their agency decreased with the assistance of the computer.

CONCLUSION:Attentional allocation greatly influences the integration of multiple cues from different processes underlying the sense of agency.

12

Action-effect comparison

Performance-based inference

Integration Sense of agency

Dominate

12

(Unpublished data)

Different aspects of attention greatly influence the sense of agency, including both sub-processes and integration of the sub-processes.

Divided attention impairs action-effect comparison but does not affect performance-based inference.

Arousal enhances the intentional binding effect (which reflects an implicit aspect of sense of agency), but does not affect agency judgment.

Attentional allocation influences weights of multiple cues in the cue-integration of sense of agency.

13

Wen WEN, The University of Tokyowen@robot.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp

Please ask questions.

14http://www.robot.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/~wen/ICP2016-wen.pdf