Cited by 173Free Will and AgencyNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesMotor Control and Adaptation

Sense of control depends on fluency of action selection, not motor performance

Open access
Chambon, Valerian, Haggard, Patrick·2012·Cognition

Abstract

Sense of agency refers to the feeling of controlling one's own actions, and, through these actions, events in the outside world. Sense of agency is widely held to involve a retrospective inference based on matching actual effects of an action with its expected effects. We hypothesise a second, prospective aspect of sense of agency, reflecting the fluency of action selection, based on results from subliminal priming of actions. When people responded to a target that was compatible with a preceding subliminal prime, they felt stronger sense of control over a subsequent colour effect than when the preceding prime was incompatible. Importantly, compatible and incompatible primes had the same predictive statistical relation to the colour effect. We next investigated whether differences in sense of control could be based on monitoring motor performance. By varying the timings of mask and target, we compared sense of control between a Positive Compatibility condition, where compatible primes facilitated performance, and a Negative Compatibility condition, where compatible primes impaired performance. We found that compatible priming again enhanced sense of control, irrespective of its effects on performance. We present a simple model of the prospective aspect of sense of agency, in which early signals reflecting action selection processing make a direct, experiential contribution to sense of control. Sense of agency may be partly based on an experience-based 'feeling of doing', analogous to the metacognitive 'feeling of knowing'.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.07.011

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Autonomy-supportive conditions facilitate performance and enhance perceptions of competence, self-efficacy, and sense of agency.

    “Potential consequences of autonomy-supportive conditions include facilitation of performance (Karsh & Eitam, 2015;Legault & Inzlicht, 2013) as well as the opportunity to enhance perceptions of competence, self-efficacy, and sense of agency (Chambon & Haggard, 2012).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chambon, V., & Haggard, P.
Affiliations
University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Haggard, Patrick
Venue
Cognition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-12
Volume
125
Issue
3
Pages
441-451
ISSN
0010-0277 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2028724940
Cited by
173
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 6
FWCI
3.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cognition (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Free Will and Agency
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
Keywords
sense of agency, perceived control, action selection, subliminal priming, compatibility effect, motor performance, feeling of knowing, metacognition, action prediction
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Internal-External Control, Male, Psychomotor Performance, Reaction Time, Subliminal Stimulation, Repetition Priming

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