Abstract
AbstractIntentional binding refers to the subjective compression of the time interval between an action and its consequence. While intentional binding has been widely used as a proxy for the sense of agency, its underlying mechanism has been largely veiled. Bayesian causal inference (BCI) has gained attention as a potential explanation, but currently lacks sufficient empirical support. Thus, this study implemented various computational models to describe the possible mechanisms of intentional binding, fitted them to individual observed data, and quantitatively evaluated their performance. The BCI models successfully isolated the parameters that potentially contributed to intentional binding (i.e., causal belief and temporal prediction) and generally better explained an observer’s time estimation than traditional models such as maximum likelihood estimation. The estimated parameter values suggested that the time compression resulted from an expectation that the actions would immediately cause sensory outcomes. Furthermore, I investigated the algorithm that realized this BCI and found probability-matching to be a plausible candidate; people might heuristically reconstruct event timing depending on causal uncertainty rather than optimally integrating causal and temporal posteriors. The evidence demonstrated the utility of computational modeling to investigate how humans infer the causal and temporal structures of events and individual differences in that process.
Funder
Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference74 articles.
1. Vallée-Tourangeau, F., Murphy, R. A. & Baker, A. G. Contiguity and the outcome density bias in action-outcome contingency judgements. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. B 58, 177–192 (2005).
2. Shanks, D. R., Pearson, S. M. & Dickinson, A. Temporal contiguity and the judgement of causality by human subjects. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. B 41, 139–159 (1989).
3. Bechlivanidis, C. & Lagnado, D. A. Does the ‘why’ tell us the ‘when’?. Psychol. Sci. 24, 1563–1572 (2013).
4. Blakey, E. et al. When causality shapes the experience of time: Evidence for temporal binding in young children. Dev. Sci. 22, e12769 (2019).
5. Buehner, M. J. & Humphreys, G. R. Causal binding of actions to their effects. Psychol. Sci. 20, 1221–1228 (2009).
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献