4.7 Article

Audiomotor Temporal Recalibration Modulates Decision Criterion of Self-Agency but Not Perceptual Sensitivity

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.580441

关键词

temporal recalibration; delayed auditory feedback; sense of agency; sensorimotor coordination; signal detection theory

资金

  1. JSPS KAKENHI [17K00218]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [17K00218] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This experimental research used signal detection theory to investigate the modulation of sense of agency by temporal recalibration, finding that the shift in decision criterion rather than perceptual sensitivity of agency is responsible for the modulation of sense of agency by temporal recalibration.
Exposure to delayed sensory feedback changes perceived simultaneity between action and feedback [temporal recalibration (TR)] and even modulates the sense of agency (SoA) over the feedback. To date, however, it is not clear whether the modulation of SoA by TR is caused by a change in perceptual sensitivity or decision criterion of self-agency. This experimental research aimed to tease apart these two by applying the signal detection theory (SDT) to the agency judgment over auditory feedback after voluntary action. Participants heard a short sequence of tone pips with equal inter-onset intervals, and they reproduced it by pressing a computer mouse. The delay of each tone pip after the mouse press was manipulated as 80 (baseline) or 180 ms (delayed). Subsequently, the participants reproduced it, in which the delay was fixed at 80 ms and there was a 50% chance that the computer took over the control of the tone pips from the participants. The participants' task was to discriminate who controlled the tone pips and to judge synchrony between tone pips and mouse presses. Results showed that the modulation of the SoA by the TR is caused by a shift in the decision criterion but not in the perceptual sensitivity of agency.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据