Cited by 11Embodied and Extended CognitionFree Will and AgencyAction Observation and Synchronization

(Dis-)attending to the body : action and self-experience in the active inference framework

Open access
Limanowski, Jakub·2017·MIND Group

Abstract

Endogenous attention is crucial and beneficial for learning, selecting, and supervising actions. However, deliberately attending to action execution usually comes at the cost of decreased smoothness and slower performance, often severely impairs normal functioning, and in the worst case may result in pathological behavior and experience as in schizophrenic hyperreflexivity. These ambiguous modulatory effects of self-directed attention have been examined on phenomenological, computational, and implementational levels of description—a recent formalization within an active inference framework aims to accommodate all of these aspects. Here, I examine the active inference account of motor control as enabled by attentional modulation based on expected precisions of prediction errors in a brain’s hierarchical generative model of the environment. The implications of active inference fit well with a range of empirical results, they resonate well with ideomotor accounts of motor control, and they also tentatively reflect many insights from phenomenological analysis of the “lived body”. Thereby a particular strength of active inference is its hierarchical account of motor control in terms of adaptive behavior driven by the imperative to maintain the organism’s states within unsurprising boundaries. Phenomena ranging from the reflex arc to intentional, goal-directed action and the experience of oneself as an embodied agent are are thus proposed to rely on the same mechanisms operating universally throughout the brain’s hierarchical generative model. However, while the explanation of movement production and sensory attenuation in terms of low-level attentional modulation is quite elegant on the active inference view, there are some questions left open by its extension to higher levels of action control and the accompanying phenomenology of for example volition, effort, or agency. I suggest that conceptual guidance from recent accounts of phenomenal self- and world-modeling may help develop active inference into an interdisciplinary framework for investigating embodied agentive self-experience.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.25358/openscience-641

Cites

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?

  • Rendering minimal self-models opaque could have dramatic consequences ranging from pathological experience to complete destruction of self-experience.

    “in fact, rendering minimal self-models opaque could have dramatic consequences ranging from pathological experience to complete destruction of the self-experience (Metzinger, 2004; Limanowski, 2017).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Limanowski, J.
Corresponding author
Limanowski, Jakub
Venue
MIND Group
Publisher
MIND Group
Published
2017
OpenAlex
W6945526307
Cited by
11
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2
FWCI
2.33
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Locations
  • Gutenberg Open Science (submittedVersion, cc-by-nd)
  • Gutenberg Open Science
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Embodied and Extended Cognition
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Free Will and Agency
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
Keywords
active inference, top-down attention, self-focus, motor control, hierarchical generative models, ideomotor theory, embodied agency, self-experience, lived body, sensory attenuation, volition, phenomenology of action

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