Timing of the intention to act reflects action feedback expectancy
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21305656 |
|---|---|
| Authors | George Evangelou (0000-0001-6682-6508, Goldsmiths University of London, corresponding author), James W Moore (0000-0001-5273-7168, Goldsmiths University of London) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Volume | 274 |
| Pages | 106570 |
| Publication date | 2026-09-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Cognition (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0010-0277 • E-ISSN: 1873-7838 |
| Publisher | Elsevier BV (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.cognition.2026.106570 |
| PMID | 42107450 |
| OpenAlex | W7160718065 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 26 |
There is ongoing debate concerning the neurocognitive basis of intention; in particular, whether it is based on predictive or postdictive processes. We addressed this by manipulating the uncertainty of receiving haptic feedback with an action. The perceived time of intention (known as 'W' judgements) was measured using the Libet clock method. In Experiment 1 (N = 36 adults), haptic feedback was either 100% present or absent, or random (50%). W was delayed under conditions of uncertainty (50%), irrespective of the presence or absence of feedback. In Experiment 2 (N = 36 adults), we directly assessed the importance of uncertainty by manipulating the probability of haptic feedback in three conditions: 100%, 75% and 25%. W was delayed in a linear fashion as the probability of receiving haptic feedback decreased. These findings suggest that the reported time of intention is partly informed by the expectancy of action-related sensory feedback
Action (physics) · Cognition · Expectancy theory · Feedback regulation · Haptic technology · Negative feedback · Neurocognitive · Free Will and Agency · Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies · Spatial Neglect and Hemispheric Dysfunction
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |