The valence of action outcomes modulates the perception of one's actions

Consciousness and Cognition

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 18-29

  Wilke, Carlo ^a   Synofzik, Matthis ^a,b   Lindner, Axel ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TÜBINGEN   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TÜBINGEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Action; Agency; Corollary discharge; Cue integration; Efference copy; Internal model; International Affective Picture System; Perception; Self; Valence

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; EYE MOVEMENT; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; MOVEMENT (PHYSIOLOGY); MOVEMENT PERCEPTION; NORMAL HUMAN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POST HOC ANALYSIS; SENSORIMOTOR FUNCTION; VIRTUAL REALITY;

ADULT; AFFECT; CUES; DIFFERENTIAL THRESHOLD; EYE MOVEMENTS; FEEDBACK, SENSORY; FEMALE; FINGERS; HUMANS; INTERNAL-EXTERNAL CONTROL; KINESTHESIS; MALE; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; SELF CONCEPT; VISUAL PERCEPTION; VOLITION;

EID: 84857505300     PISSN: 10538100     EISSN: 10902376     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2011.06.004     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Aarts H., Custers R., Wegner D.M. On the inference of personal authorship: Enhancing experienced agency by priming effect information. Consciousness and Cognition 2005, 14(3):439-458.
2. Bays P.M., Wolpert D.M. Computational principles of sensorimotor control that minimize uncertainty and variability. The Journal of Physiology 2007, 578(2):387-396.
3. Beckman L. Effects of students' performance on teachers' and observers' attributions of causality. Journal of Educational Psychology 1970, 61(1):76-82.
4. Bell C.C. Memory-based expectations in electrosensory systems. Current Opinion in Neurobiology 2001, 11(4):481-487.
5. Blakemore S.J., Frith C.D., Wolpert D.M. Spatio-temporal prediction modulates the perception of self-produced stimuli. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1999, 11(5):551-559.
6. Cressman E.K., Henriques D.Y. Sensory recalibration of hand position following visuomotor adaptation. Journal of Neurophysiology 2009, 102(6):3505-3518.
7. Cressman E.K., Henriques D.Y. Reach adaptation and proprioceptive recalibration following exposure to misaligned sensory input. Journal of Neurophysiology 2010, 103(4):1888-1895.
8. Cressman E.K., Salomonczyk D., Henriques D.Y. Visuomotor adaptation and proprioceptive recalibration in older adults. Experimental Brain Research 2010, 205(4):533-544.
9. Fiehler K., Rosler F., Henriques D.Y. Interaction between gaze and visual and proprioceptive position judgements. Experimental Brain Research 2010, 203(3):485-498.
10. Fourneret P., Jeannerod M. Limited conscious monitoring of motor performance in normal subjects. Neuropsychologia 1998, 36(11):1133-1140.
11. Frith C.D. The cognitive neuropsychology of schizophrenia/Christopher D. Frith 1992, L. Erlbaum Associates, Hove, UK, Hillsdale, US.
12. Frith C.D. The self in action: Lessons from delusions of control. Consciousness and Cognition 2005, 14(4):752-770.
13. Frith C.D., Blakemore S.J., Wolpert D.M. Abnormalities in the awareness and control of action. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences 2000, 355(1404):1771-1788.
14. Goodale M.A., Milner A.D. Separate visual pathways for perception and action. Trends in Neurosciences 1992, 15(1):20-25.
15. Haarmeier T., Bunjes F., Lindner A., Berret E., Thier P. Optimizing visual motion perception during eye movements. Neuron 2001, 32(3):527-535.
16. Irtel, H. (2008). The PXLab Self-Assessment-Manikin Scales. (retrieved 30.01.11). http://irtel.uni-mannheim.de/pxlab/demos/index_SAM.html.
17. Isaacowitz D.M., Allard E.S., Murphy N.A., Schlangel M. The time course of age-related preferences toward positive and negative stimuli. Journals of Gerontology. Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences 2009, 64(2):188-192.
18. Johansson P., Hall L., Sikstrom S., Olsson A. Failure to detect mismatches between intention and outcome in a simple decision task. Science 2005, 310(5745):116-119.
19. Johnson T.J., Feigenbaum R., Weiby M. Some determinants and consequences of the teacher's perception of causation. Journal of Educational Psychology 1964, 55(5):237-246.
20. Jones S.A., Cressman E.K., Henriques D.Y. Proprioceptive localization of the left and right hands. Experimental Brain Research 2010, 204(3):373-383.
21. Körding K., Wolpert D.M. Bayesian integration in sensorimotor learning. Nature 2004, 427(6971):244-247.
22. Lang P.J. Behavioral treatment and bio-behavioral assessment: Computer applications. Technology in mental health care delivery systems 1980, 119-167. Ablex, Norwood, NY. J.B. Sidowski, J.H. Johnson, T.A. Williams (Eds.).
23. Lang P.J., Bradley M.M., Cuthbert B.N. International affective picture system (IAPS): Affective ratings of pictures and instruction manual 2008, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
24. Lieberman H.R., Pentland A. Microcomputer-based estimation of psychophysical thresholds: The Best PEST. Behaviour Research Methods & Instrumentation 1982, 14(1):21-25.
25. Linser K., Goschke T. Unconscious modulation of the conscious experience of voluntary control. Cognition 2007, 104(3):459-475.
26. McKee S.P., Klein S.A., Teller D.Y. Statistical properties of forced-choice psychometric functions: Implications of probit analysis. Perception & Psychophysics 1985, 37(4):286-298.
27. Miller D.T., Ross M. Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or fiction?. Psychological Bulletin 1975, 82(2):213-225.
28. Moore J.W., Wegner D.M., Haggard P. Modulating the sense of agency with external cues. Consciousness and Cognition 2009.
29. Nummenmaa L., Hyona J., Calvo M.G. Eye movement assessment of selective attentional capture by emotional pictures. Emotion 2006, 6(2):257-268.
30. Peeters G., Czapinski J. Positive-negative asymmetry in evaluations: The distinction between affective and informational negativity effects. European Review of Social Psychology 1990, (1):33-60.
31. Press C., Gherri E., Heyes C., Eimer M. Action preparation helps and hinders perception of action. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2010, 22(10):2198-2211.
32. Sato A. Both motor prediction and conceptual congruency between preview and action-effect contribute to explicit judgment of agency. Cognition 2009, 110(1):74-83.
33. Schenk T., Franz V., Bruno N. Vision-for-perception and vision-for-action: Which model is compatible with the available psychophysical and neuropsychological data?. Vision Research 2011, 51(8):812-818.
34. Scherer K.R. What are emotions? And how can they be measured?. Social Science Information 2005, 44(4):695-729.
35. Shergill S.S., Bays P.M., Frith C.D., Wolpert D.M. Two eyes for an eye: The neuroscience of force escalation. Science 2003, 301(5630):187.
36. Smeets J.B., Brenner E., de Grave D.D., Cuijpers R.H. Illusions in action: Consequences of inconsistent processing of spatial attributes. Experimental Brain Research 2002, 147(2):135-144.
37. Sommer M.A., Wurtz R.H. A pathway in primate brain for internal monitoring of movements. Science 2002, 296(5572):1480-1482.
38. Sperry R.W. Neural basis of the spontaneous optokinetic response produced by visual inversion. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology 1950, 43(6):482-489.
39. Synofzik M., Lindner A., Thier P. The cerebellum updates predictions about the visual consequences of one's behavior. Current Biology 2008, 18(11):814-818.
40. Synofzik M., Thier P., Leube D.T., Schlotterbeck P., Lindner A. Misattributions of agency in schizophrenia are based on imprecise predictions about the sensory consequences of one's actions. Brain 2010, 133(Pt 1):262-271.
41. Synofzik M., Thier P., Lindner A. Internalizing agency of self-action: Perception of one's own hand movements depends on an adaptable prediction about the sensory action outcome. Journal of Neurophysiology 2006, 96(3):1592-1601.
42. Synofzik M., Vosgerau G., Lindner A. Me or not me - An optimal integration of agency cues?. Consciousness and Cognition 2009, 18(4):1065-1068.
43. Synofzik M., Vosgerau G., Newen A. Beyond the comparator model: A multifactorial two-step account of agency. Consciousness and Cognition 2008, 17(1):219-239.
44. Synofzik M., Vosgerau G., Newen A. I move, therefore I am: A new theoretical framework to investigate agency and ownership. Consciousness and Cognition 2008, 17(2):411-424.
45. Taylor S.E. Asymmetrical effects of positive and negative events: The mobilization-minimization hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin 1991, 110(1):67-85.
46. Tetlock P.E., Levi A. Attribution bias: On the inconclusiveness of the cognition-motivation debate. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 1982, 18(1):68-88.
47. van Beers R.J., Wolpert D.M., Haggard P. When feeling is more important than seeing in sensorimotor adaptation. Current Biology 2002, 12(10):834-837.
48. von Holst E., Mittelstaedt H. Das Reafferenzprinzip. Naturwissenschaften 1950, 37(20):464-476.
49. Voss M., Ingram J.N., Haggard P., Wolpert D.M. Sensorimotor attenuation by central motor command signals in the absence of movement. Nature Neuroscience 2006, 9(1):26-27.
50. Wegner D.M., Sparrow B. Authorship processing. The new cognitive neurosciences 2004, 1201-1209. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. M.S. Gazzaniga (Ed.).
51. Wohlschläger A., Engbert K., Haggard P. Intentionality as a constituting condition for the own self - And other selves. Consciousness and Cognition 2003, 12(4):708-716.
52. Wolosin R.J., Sherman S.J., Till A. Effects of cooperation and competition on responsibility attribution after success and failure. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 1973, 9(3):220-235.
53. Wolpert D.M., Ghahramani Z., Jordan M.I. An internal model for sensorimotor integration. Science 1995, 269(5232):1880-1882.
54. Wolpert D.M., Miall R.C., Kawato M. Internal models in the cerebellum. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 1998, 2(9):338-347.