What Makes Action and Outcome Temporally Close to Each Other: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Temporal Binding
In: Timing & Time PerceptionSearch for other papers by Takumi Tanaka in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Takuya Matsumoto in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Shintaro Hayashi in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Shiro Takagi in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Hideaki Kawabata in
Current site
Google Scholar
Temporal binding refers to the subjective compression of the temporal interval between a voluntary action and its external sensory consequences. While empirical evidence and theoretical accounts have indicated the potential linkage between temporal binding and action outcome prediction mechanisms, several questions regarding the underlying processes and the fundamental nature of temporal binding remain unanswered. Based on the sophisticated classification of predictive processes proposed by Hughes et al. (2013), we conducted a systematic, quantitative review of the binding effect as measured with two representative procedures, i.e., Libet clock procedure and interval estimation procedure. Although both procedures were designed to measure the same phenomenon, we revealed a larger effect size and higher sensitivity to perceptual moderators in binding observed with the clock procedure than with the interval estimation. Moreover, in the former, we observed different characteristics for the two perceptual shifts that comprise temporal binding. Action shifts depended more on whether one can control outcome onsets with voluntary actions. In contrast, outcome shifts depended more on the degree to which participants could predict, rather than control, the action outcome onset. These results indicate that action shift occurs based on the activation of learned action–outcome associations by planning and executing actions, while outcome shift occurs based on comparing predicted and observed outcomes. By understanding the nature of each experimental procedure and each shift, future research can use optimal methods depending on the goal. We discuss, as an example, the implications for the underlying disorders of agency in schizophrenia.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
Aliu S. O. , Houde J. F. , & Nagarajan S. S. (2009). Motor-induced suppression of the auditory cortex. J. Cogn. Neurosci. , 21 , 791–802.
-
Baldo M. V. C. , & Klein S. A. (1995). Extrapolation or attention shift? Nature, 378, 565−566.
-
Beck B. , Di Costa S. , & Haggard P. (2017). Having control over the external world increases the implicit sense of agency. Cognition , 162, 54–60.
-
Bednark J. G. , Poonian S. K. , Palghat K. , McFadyen J. , & Cunnington R. (2015). Identity-specific predictions and implicit measures of agency. Psychol. Conscious. , 2, 253–268.
-
Borenstein M. , Hedges L. V. , Higgins J. P. T. , & Rothstein H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons.
-
Borhani K. , Beck B. , & Haggard P. (2017). Choosing, doing, and controlling: implicit sense of agency over somatosensory events. Psychol. Sci. , 28, 882–893.
-
Braun N. , Thorne J. D. , Hildebrandt H. , & Debener S. (2014). Interplay of agency and ownership: the intentional binding and rubber hand illusion paradigm combined. PloS One , 9, e111967. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0111967
-
Buehner M. J. (2012). Understanding the past, predicting the future: causation, not intentional action, is the root of temporal binding. Psychol. Sci. , 23, 1490–1497.
-
Buehner M. J. (2015). Awareness of voluntary and involuntary causal actions and their outcomes. Psychol. Conscious. , 2, 237– 252.
-
Buehner M.J. , & Humphreys G.R. , 2009. Causal binding of actions to their effects. Psychol. Sci. , 20, 1221–1228.
-
Chambon V. , Moore J. W. , & Haggard P. (2015). TMS stimulation over the inferior parietal cortex disrupts prospective sense of agency. Brain Struct. Funct. , 220, 3627–3639.
-
Christensen J.F. , Di Costa S. , Beck B. , & Haggard P. (2019). I just lost it! Fear and anger reduce the sense of agency: a study using intentional binding. Exp. Brain. Res., 237, 1205-1212.
-
Cravo A. M. , & Baldo M. V. C. (2008). A psychophysical and computational analysis of the spatio-temporal mechanisms underlying the flash-lag effect. Perception , 37, 1850−1866.
-
Cravo A. M. , Claessens P. M. E. , & Baldo M. V. C. (2009). Voluntary action and causality in temporal binding. Exp. Brain Res. , 199, 95–99.
-
Cravo A. M. , Claessens P. M. , & Baldo M. V. (2011). The relation between action, predictability and temporal contiguity in temporal binding. Acta Psychol. (Amst.), 136(1), 157–166. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.11.005
-
Cravo A. M. , Haddad H. , Claessens P. M. , & Baldo M. V. (2013). Bias and learning in temporal binding: intervals between actions and outcomes are compressed by prior bias. Conscious. Cogn., 22(4), 1174–1180. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2013.08.001
-
Desantis A. , Roussel C. , & Waszak F. (2011). On the influence of causal beliefs on the feeling of agency. Conscious. Cogn. , 20, 1211–1220.
-
Desantis A. , Hughes G. , & Waszak F. (2012). Intentional binding is driven by the mere presence of an action and not by motor prediction. PLoS One , 7, e29557.
-
Dewey J. A. , & Knoblich G. (2014). Do implicit and explicit measures of the sense of agency measure the same thing? PloS One , 9, e110118.
-
Di Costa S. , Théro H. , Chambon V. , & Haggard P. (2018). Try and try again: Post-error boost of an implicit measure of agency. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. , 71, 1584–1595.
-
Duval S. , & Tweedie R. (2000). Trim and fill: a simple funnel-plot–based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics, 56(2), 455–463.
-
Eagleman D. M. (2008). Human time perception and its illusions. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. , 18, 131–136.
-
Engbert K. , Wohlschläger A. , Thomas R. , & Haggard P. (2007). Agency, subjective time, and other minds. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. , 33, 1261–1268.
-
Engbert K. , Wohlschläger A. , & Haggard P. (2008). Who is causing what? The sense of agency is relational and efferent-triggered. Cognition , 107, 693–704.
-
Faraway J. J. (2016). Extending the linear model with R: generalized linear, mixed effects and nonparametric regression models. New York, NY, USA: Chapman and Hall/CRC.
-
Fereday R. , & Buehner M. J. (2017). Temporal binding and internal clocks: No evidence for general pacemaker slowing. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. , 43, 971–985.
-
Formby C. , Morgan L. N. , Forrest T. G. , & Raney J. J. (1992). The role of frequency selectivity in measures of auditory and vibrotactile temporal resolution. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. , 91, 293–305.
-
Gallagher I. (2000). Philosophical conceptions of the self: implications for cognitive science. Trends Cogn. Sci. , 4, 14–21.
-
Graham-Schmidt K. T. , Martin-Iverson M. T. , Holmes N. P. , & Waters F. A. V. (2016). When one’s sense of agency goes wrong: Absent modulation of time perception by voluntary actions and reduction of perceived length of intervals in passivity symptoms in schizophrenia. Conscious. Cogn., 45, 9–23.
-
Haering C. , & Kiesel A. (2012). Mine is earlier than yours: causal beliefs influence the perceived time of action effects. Front. Psychol. , 3, 393.
-
Haering C. , & Kiesel A. (2014). Intentional binding is independent of the validity of the action effect's identity. Acta Psychol. , 152, 109–119.
-
Haggard P. , Clark S. , & Kalogeras J. (2002). Voluntary action and conscious awareness. Nat. Neurosci., 5(4), 382–385.
-
Hayes A. F. , & Krippendorff K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Commun Methods Meas , 1, 77–89.
-
Hedges L. V. , Tipton E. , & Johnson M. C. (2010). Robust variance estimation in meta-regression with dependent effect size estimates. Res. Synth. Method , 1, 39–65.
-
Hughes G. , Desantis A. , & Waszak F. (2013). Mechanisms of intentional binding and sensory attenuation: The role of temporal prediction, temporal control, identity prediction, and motor prediction. Psychol. Bull. , 139, 133–151.
-
Hume D. (1739/1964). A treatise of human nature. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
-
Humphreys G. R. , & Buehner M. J. (2009). Magnitude estimation reveals temporal binding at super-second intervals . J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. , 35, 1542–1549.
-
Humphreys G. R. , & Buehner M. J. (2010). Temporal binding of action and effect in interval reproduction. Exp. Brain Res. , 203, 465-470.
-
Imaizumi S. , & Tanno Y. (2019). Intentional binding coincides with explicit sense of agency. Conscious. Cogn. , 67, 1-15.
-
Khalighinejad N. , Bahrami B. , Caspar E. A. , & Haggard P. (2016). Social transmission of experience of agency: an experimental study. Front. Psychol. , 7, 1315. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01315
-
Kong G. , He K. , & Wei K. (2017). Sensorimotor experience in virtual reality enhances sense of agency associated with an avatar. Conscious. Cogn. , 52, 115–124.
-
Konstantopoulos S. (2011). Fixed effects and variance components estimation in three-level meta-analysis. Res. Synth. Methods , 2, 61–76.
-
Krippendorff K. (2011). Agreement and information in the reliability of coding. Commun. Methods Meas. , 5, 93–112.
-
Lakens D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Front. Psychol. , 4, 863. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863
-
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 (readiness-potential) the unconscious initiation of a freely voluntary act. Brain , 106, 623–642. doi: 10.1093/brain/106.3.623
-
Majchrowicz B. , & Wierzchoń M. (2018). Unexpected action outcomes produce enhanced temporal binding but diminished judgement of agency. Conscious. Cogn. , 65, 310-324.
-
Moore J. , & Haggard P. (2008). Awareness of action: Inference and prediction. Conscious. Cogn. , 17, 136–144.
-
Moore J. W. , & Obhi S. S. (2012). Intentional binding and the sense of agency: a review. Conscious. Cogn. , 21, 546–561.
-
Moore J. W. , Wegner D. M. , & Haggard P. (2009a). Modulating the sense of agency with external cues. Conscious. Cogn. , 18, 1056–1064.
-
Moore J. W. , Lagnado D. , Deal D. C. , & Haggard P. (2009b). Feelings of control: contingency determines experience of action. Cognition , 110, 279–283.
-
Moore J. W. , Ruge D. , Wenke D. , Rothwell J. , & Haggard P. (2010a). Disrupting the experience of control in the human brain: pre-supplementary motor area contributes to the sense of agency. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. , 277, 2503–2509.
-
Moore J. W. , Schneider S. A. , Schwingenschuh P. , Moretto G. , Bhatia K. P. , & Haggard P. (2010b). Dopaminergic medication boosts action-effect binding in Parkinson’s disease. Neuropsychologia , 48, 1125–1132.
-
Moore J. W. , Dickinson A. , & Fletcher P. C. (2011a). Sense of agency, associative learning, and schizotypy. Conscious. Cogn. , 20, 792–800.
-
Moore J. W. , Turner D. C. , Corlett P. R. , Arana F. S. , Morgan H. L. , Absalom A. R. , Adapa R. , de Wit S. , Everitt J. C. , Gardner J. M. , Pigott J. S. , Haggard P. , & Fletcher P. C. (2011b). Ketamine administration in healthy volunteers reproduces aberrant agency experiences associated with schizophrenia. Cogn. Neuropsychiatry , 16, 364–381.
-
Moretto G. , Walsh E. , & Haggard P. (2011). Experience of agency and sense of responsibility. Conscious. Cogn. , 20, 1847–1854.
-
Niemi P. , & Näätänen R. (1981). Foreperiod and simple reaction time. Psychol. Bull. , 89, 133–162.
-
Nijhawan R. (1994). Motion extrapolation in catching. Nature , 370, 256−257.
-
Pariyadath V. , & Eagleman D.M. (2007). The effect of predictability on subjective duration. PLoS One , 2, e1264. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001264
-
Parsons B. D. , Novich S. D. , & Eagleman D. M. (2013). Motor-sensory recalibration modulates perceived simultaneity of cross-modal events at different distances. Front. Psychol. , 4 , 46. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00046
-
Poonian S. K. , & Cunnington R. (2013). Intentional binding in self-made and observed actions. Exp. Brain Res. , 229, 419–427.
-
Poonian S. K. , McFadyen J. , Ogden J. , & Cunnington R. (2015). Implicit agency in observed actions: evidence for N1 suppression of tones caused by self-made and observed actions. J. Cogn. Neurosci. , 27, 752–764.
-
Rohatgi A . (2012) WebPlotDigitalizer: HTML5 based online tool to extract numerical data from plot images. Version 3. Retrieved from https://automeris.io/WebPlotDigitizer/
-
Rohde M. , Greiner L. , & Ernst M. O. (2014). Asymmetries in visuomotor recalibration of time perception: does causal binding distort the window of integration? Acta Psychol. (Amst.) , 147, 127–135.
-
Ruess M. , Thomaschke R. , & Kiesel A. (2017). The time course of intentional binding. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. , 79, 1123–1131.
-
Ruess M. , Thomaschke R. , Haering C. , Wenke D. , & Kiesel A. (2018a). Intentional binding of two effects. Psychol. Res. , 82, 1102–1112.
-
Ruess M. , Thomaschke R. , & Kiesel A. (2018b). Intentional binding of visual effects. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. , 80, 713–722.
-
Ruess M. , Thomaschke R. , & Kiesel A. (2018c). The time course of intentional binding for late effects. Timing Time Percept. , 6, 54–70.
-
Sato A. (2009). Both motor prediction and conceptual congruency between preview and action-effect contribute to explicit judgment of agency. Cognition , 110, 74–83.
-
Saito N. , Takahata K. , Yamakado H. , Sawamoto N. , Saito S. , Takahashi R. , Murai T. , & Takahashi H. (2017). Altered awareness of action in Parkinson’s disease: evaluations by explicit and implicit measures. Sci. Rep. , 7, 8019. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-08482-0
-
Schafer E. W. , & Marcus M. M. (1973). Self-stimulation alters human sensory brain responses. Science , 181, 175–177.
-
Shimojo S. , Scheier C. , Nijhawan R. , Shams L. , Kamitani Y , Watanabe K. (2001). Beyond perceptual modality: auditory effects on visual perception. Acoust. Sci. Technol. , 22, 61–67.
-
Suzuki K. , Lush P. , Seth A. , & Roseboom W. (2019). Intentional binding without intentional action. Psychol. Sci. , 2019, 842–853.
-
Synofzik M. , Vosgerau G. , & Newen A. (2008). Beyond the comparator model: A multifactorial two-step account of agency. Conscious. Cogn. , 17, 219-239.
-
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, e53421. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0053421
-
Tanaka T. , & Kawabata H. (2019). Sense of agency is modulated by interactions between action choice, outcome valence, and predictability. Curr. Psychol. in press. doi: 10.1007/s12144-018-0121-3
-
Tsakiris M. , & Haggard P. (2003). Awareness of somatic events associated with a voluntary action. Exp. Brain Res. , 149, 439–446.
-
Viechtbauer W. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J. Stat. Softw. , 36, 1–48.
-
Vastano R. , Pozzo T. , & Brass M. (2017). The action congruency effect on the feelings of agency. Conscious. Cogn. , 51, 212–222.
-
Voss M. , Moore J. , Hauser M. , Gallinat J. , Heinz A. , & Haggard P. (2010). Altered awareness of action in schizophrenia: a specific deficit in predicting action consequences. Brain , 133, 3104–3112.
-
Waszak F. , Cardoso-Leite P. , & Hughes G. (2012). Action effect anticipation: neurophysiological basis and functional consequences. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. , 36, 943–959.
-
Welcz R, B. and Warren D, H. (1980). Immediate perceptual response to intersensory discrepancy. Psychol. Bull. , 88, 638–667.
-
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.
-
Wenke D. , Waszak F. , & Haggard P. (2009). Action selection and action awareness. Psychol. Res. , 73, 602–612.
-
Wolpe N. , Haggard P. , Siebner H. R. , & Rowe J. B. (2013). Cue integration and the perception of action in intentional binding. Exp. Brain Res. , 229, 467–474.
-
Wolpert D. M. , Ghahramani Z. , & Jordan M. I. (1995). An internal model for sensorimotor integration. Science , 269, 1880–1882.
-
Yang J. H. , Cheng C. P. , & Liao R. M. (2018). Effects of d-amphetamine on risk choice in rats depend on the manner in which the expected reward value is varied. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. , 171, 20–29.
-
Yoshie M. , & Haggard P. (2013). Negative emotional outcomes attenuate sense of agency over voluntary actions. Curr. Biol. , 23, 2028–2032.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 3053 | 517 | 26 |
| Full Text Views | 243 | 51 | 9 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 333 | 95 | 8 |
What Makes Action and Outcome Temporally Close to Each Other: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Temporal Binding
In: Timing & Time PerceptionSearch for other papers by Takumi Tanaka in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Takuya Matsumoto in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Shintaro Hayashi in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Shiro Takagi in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Hideaki Kawabata in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Temporal binding refers to the subjective compression of the temporal interval between a voluntary action and its external sensory consequences. While empirical evidence and theoretical accounts have indicated the potential linkage between temporal binding and action outcome prediction mechanisms, several questions regarding the underlying processes and the fundamental nature of temporal binding remain unanswered. Based on the sophisticated classification of predictive processes proposed by Hughes et al. (2013), we conducted a systematic, quantitative review of the binding effect as measured with two representative procedures, i.e., Libet clock procedure and interval estimation procedure. Although both procedures were designed to measure the same phenomenon, we revealed a larger effect size and higher sensitivity to perceptual moderators in binding observed with the clock procedure than with the interval estimation. Moreover, in the former, we observed different characteristics for the two perceptual shifts that comprise temporal binding. Action shifts depended more on whether one can control outcome onsets with voluntary actions. In contrast, outcome shifts depended more on the degree to which participants could predict, rather than control, the action outcome onset. These results indicate that action shift occurs based on the activation of learned action–outcome associations by planning and executing actions, while outcome shift occurs based on comparing predicted and observed outcomes. By understanding the nature of each experimental procedure and each shift, future research can use optimal methods depending on the goal. We discuss, as an example, the implications for the underlying disorders of agency in schizophrenia.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 3053 | 517 | 26 |
| Full Text Views | 243 | 51 | 9 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 333 | 95 | 8 |