Did I do that? Brain–computer interfacing and the sense of agency.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
eBCIs raise the prospect of third-party actors changing what a person 'wills,' perhaps without their consent.
“eBCIs raise the prospect of third-party actors changing what a person “wills,” perhaps without their consent [45].”
From Ethical considerations for the use of brain–computer interfaces for cognitive enhancement (2024) · cites this paper as [45]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 56 · Cited by 70
- Authors
- Haselager, P.
- Affiliations
- Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Haselager, Pim
- ORCID
- Haselager, Pim
- Venue
- Minds and Machines
- Published
- 2012-12-13
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 405-418
- ISSN
- 0924-6495 (ISSN-L)
- 1572-8641
- OpenAlex
- W2159471651
- Cited by
- 70
- References
- 56
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 7
- FWCI
- 1.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Minds and Machines (publishedVersion)
- Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Free Will and Agency
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Cybernetics and Technology in Society
- Keywords
- brain-computer interface, sense of agency, smart devices, human-machine interaction, legal responsibility
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
