Skip to main content

Sense of agency is modulated by interactions between action choice, outcome valence, and predictability

Abstract

Sense of agency is a feeling of control over one’s actions to cause sensory events in one’s environment. While previous studies investigated the role of action choice and emotional valence of action outcome in forming implicit agency, the results were not consistent and the relationship between these factors remains unclear. We manipulated both action alternatives available and emotional valences of sounds (either positive or negative) as action outcomes and measured the resultant intentional binding effects in two experiments that differed in predictability of outcome valence. When participants could not predict the valence of action outcomes, they showed stronger sense of agency for negative outcomes determined by their free choice (Experiment 1). Conversely, when participants’ actions caused only outcomes with specific valence, this interaction was not observed (Experiment 2). These findings imply that the implicit processes of agency reflect an integrative context-dependent cognition of consequence of action choice, prior to explicit attribution judgments.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Data Availability

The datasets analyzed during the current study are available in the Open Science Framework repository, https://osf.io/byv5c/.

References

  1. Barlas, Z., & Obhi, S. (2013). Freedom, choice, and the sense of agency. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 514. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00514.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Barlas, Z., Hockley, W. E., & Obhi, S. S. (2017). The effects of freedom of choice in action selection on perceived mental effort and the sense of agency. Acta Psychologica, 180, 122–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2017.09.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Barlas, Z., Hockley, W. E., & Obhi, S. S. (2018). Effects of free choice and outcome valence on the sense of agency: Evidence from measures of intentional binding and feelings of control. Experimental Brain Research, 236(1), 129–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-017-5112-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Beck, B., Di Costa, S., & Haggard, P. (2017). Having control over the external world increases the implicit sense of agency. Cognition, 162, 54–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2017.02.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Blakemore, S. J., Wolpert, D. M., & Frith, C. D. (1998). Central cancellation of self-produced tickle sensation. Nature Neuroscience, 1, 635–640. https://doi.org/10.1038/2870.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Borhani, K., Beck, B., & Haggard, P. (2017). Choosing, doing, and controlling: Implicit sense of agency over somatosensory events. Psychological Science, 28(7), 882–893.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bossuyt, E., Moors, A., & De Houwer, J. (2014). Exploring the relations between regret, self-agency, and the tendency to repair using experimental methods and structural equation modeling. The Psychological Record, 64(4), 841–857. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-014-0065-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (2007). International Affective Digitized Sounds (2nd edn.): Affective ratings of Sounds and Instruction Manual (Technical Report No. B-3). Gainesville, FL: University of Florida, NIMH Center for the Study of Emotion and Attention.

  9. Brainard, D. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 443–446. https://doi.org/10.1163/156856897x00357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Buehner, M. J. (2012). Understanding the past, predicting the future. Causation, not intentional action, is the root of temporal binding. Psychological Science, 23(12), 1490–1497. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612444612.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Caspar, E. A., Christensen, J. F., Cleeremans, A., & Haggard, P. (2016). Coercion changes the sense of agency in the human brain. Current Biology, 26(5), 585–592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2015.12.067.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Caspar, E. A., Vuillaume, L., Magalhães De Saldanha da Gama, P. A., & Cleeremans, A. (2017). The influence of (dis)belief in free will on immoral behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 20. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00020.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Christensen, J. F., Yoshie, M., Di Costa, S., & Haggard, P. (2016). Emotional valence, sense of agency and responsibility: A study using intentional binding. Consciousness and Cognition, 43, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2016.02.016.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Cravo, A. M., Claessens, P. M., & Baldo, M. V. (2009). Voluntary action and causality in temporal binding. Experimental Brain Research, 199(1), 95–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-009-1969-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Desantis, A., Roussel, C., & Waszak, F. (2011). On the influence of causal beliefs on the feeling of agency. Consciousness and Cognition, 20(4), 1211–1220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Di Costa, S., Théro, H., Chambon, V., & Haggard, P. (2017). Try and try again: Post-error boost of an implicit measure of agency. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2017.1350871.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Frith, C. D. (2014). Action, agency and responsibility. Neuropsychologia, 55, 137–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.09.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gallagher, I. (2000). Philosophical conceptions of the self: Implications for cognitive science. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(1), 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1364-6613(99)01417-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gentsch, A., & Synofzik, M. (2014). Affective coding: The emotional dimension of agency. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 608. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00608.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Gentsch, A., Weiss, C., Spengler, S., Synofzik, M., & Schütz-Bosbach, S. (2015). Doing good or bad: How interactions between action and emotion expectations shape the sense of agency. Social Neuroscience, 10(4), 418–430. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470919.2015.1006374.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Haggard, P., & Chambon, V. (2012). Sense of agency. Current Biology, 22(10), R390–R392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2012.02.040.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Haggard, P., Clark, S., & Kalogeras, J. (2002). Voluntary action and conscious awareness. Nature Neuroscience, 5(4), 382–385. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn827.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Karsh, N., & Eitam, B. (2015). I control therefore I do: Judgments of agency influence action selection. Cognition, 138, 122–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.02.002.

  24. Kleiner, M., Brainard, D., Pelli, D., Ingling, A., Murray, R., & Broussard, C. (2007). What’s new in Psychtoolbox-3. Perception, 36(14), 1.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Langer, E. J. (1975). The illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 311–328. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.32.2.311.

  26. Lepron, E., Causse, M., & Farrer, C. (2015). Responsibility and the sense of agency enhance empathy for pain. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 282(1799), 20142288. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.2288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Libet, B., Gleason, C. A., Wright, E. W., & Pearl, D. K. (1983). Time of conscious intention to act in relation to onset of cerebral activity (readi-ness-potential)—The unconscious initiation of a freely voluntary act. Brain, 106, 623–642. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/106.3.623.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mezulis, A. H., Abramson, L. Y., Hyde, J. S., & Hankin, B. L. (2004). Is there a universal positivity bias in attributions? A meta-analytic review of individual, developmental, and cultural differences in the self-serving attributional bias. Psychological Bulletin, 130(5), 711–747. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.5.711.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(4), 371–378. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Mistry, P., & Liljeholm, M. (2016). Instrumental divergence and the value of control. Scientific Reports, 6, 36295. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep36295.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Moore, J., & Haggard, P. (2008). Awareness of action: Inference and prediction. Consciousness and Cognition, 17(1), 136–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2006.12.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Moore, J. W., & Obhi, S. S. (2012). Intentional binding and the sense of agency: A review. Consciousness and Cognition, 21(1), 546–561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2011.12.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Moore, J. W., Ruge, D., Wenke, D., Rothwell, J., & Haggard, P. (2010). Disrupting the experience of control in the human brain: Presupplementary motor area contributes to the sense of agency. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B: Biological Sciences, 277, 2503–2509. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2010.0404.

  34. Moreton, J., Callan, M. J., & Hughes, G. (2017). How much does emotional valence of action outcomes affect temporal binding? Consciousness and Cognition, 49, 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2016.12.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Moretto, G., Walsh, E., & Haggard, P. (2011). Experience of agency and sense of responsibility. Consciousness and Cognition, 20(4), 1847–1854. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2011.08.014.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Obhi, S. S., & Hall, P. (2011). Sense of agency and intentional binding in joint action. Experimental Brain Research, 211(3–4), 655–662. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-011-2675-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Pelli, D. G. (1997). The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10(4), 437–442. https://doi.org/10.1163/156856897x00366.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Pfister, R., Obhi, S. S., Rieger, M., & Wenke, D. (2014). Action and perception in social contexts: Intentional binding for social action effects. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 667. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00667.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Rizley, R. (1978). Depression and distortion in the attribution of causality. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87(1), 32–48. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-843x.87.1.32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Seligman, M. E. P. (1968). Chronic fear produced by unpredictable electric shock. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 66(2), 402–411. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0026355.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Synofzik, M., Vosgerau, G., & Newen, A. (2008). Beyond the comparator model: a multifactorial two-step account of agency. Consciousness and Cognition, 17(1), 219–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2007.03.010.

  42. Takahata, K., Takahashi, H., Maeda, T., Umeda, S., Suhara, T., Mimura, M., & Kato, M. (2012). It’s not my fault: Postdictive modulation of intentional binding by monetary gains and losses. PLoS One, 7(12), e53421. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0053421.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Wolpe, N., Haggard, P., Siebner, H. R., & Rowe, J. B. (2013). Cue integration and the perception of action in intentional binding. Experimental Brain Research, 229(3), 467–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Woolfolk, R. L., Doris, J. M., & Darley, J. M. (2006). Identification, situational constraint, and social cognition: Studies in the attribution of moral responsibility. Cognition, 100(2), 283–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2005.05.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Yoshie, M., & Haggard, P. (2013). Negative emotional outcomes attenuate sense of agency over voluntary actions. Current Biology, 23(20), 2028–2032. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2013.08.034.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Yoshie, M., & Haggard, P. (2017). Effects of emotional valence on sense of agency require a predictive model. Scientific Reports, 7(1), 8733. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-08803-3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI [grant no. JP16H01515]. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analyses, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Takumi Tanaka.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All experiments in this study were approved by the local ethical committee of the Keio University, Japan.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study with a written consent form.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tanaka, T., Kawabata, H. Sense of agency is modulated by interactions between action choice, outcome valence, and predictability. Curr Psychol 40, 1795–1806 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-0121-3

Download citation

Keywords

  • Sense of agency
  • Intentional binding
  • Action choice
  • Emotional valence
  • Action-outcome predictability