Absence of electroencephalographic evidence of implicit action-effect intentional binding with varying effect probability

Abstract

The subjective experience of an attraction in time of an action and the event caused by the action is known as the intentional binding phenomenon. Intentional binding is a robust phenomenon and has been associated with subjective sense of agency. In this study we tested possible electrophysiological equivalents to the intentional binding phenomenon under a simple action-effect task, where pressing of a button caused tones to occur at different pitches or delays with different probabilities. Changing the probabilities of the effect of an action has previously shown to influence the intentional binding phenomenon. We tested whether changes in action-effect probability gave rise to differences in movement related cortical potentials (MRCP) slopes, peak latency and auditory event related potential (aERP) changes of amplitude or latency of the N1 and P2 components of the central aERP. We also tested differences in MRCP across the whole scalp prior to movements, and to differences in aERP across the whole scalp after the tone is played. Contrary to our expectations, we found no electrophysiological indications of intentional binding when action-effect contingencies were changed according to conditions that give rise to subjective experience of binding in time.

Being an Avatar “for Real”: A Survey on Virtual Embodiment in Augmented Reality

“…Some have used EEG to measure intentional binding, an internal process that was identified as crucial for the normal experience of agency [116], [117]. However, the relationship between EEG and intentional binding is still controversial [118] and EEG recording has several drawbacks when integrated into avatar embodiment applications: on top of being time-consuming to set up, most non-intrusive EEG systems are very sensitive to muscle activity and electrical noise in the environment, limiting the embodiment to an immobile experience with very little possibilities of interaction. Further details on EEG setup and signal processing for the study of body ownership illusions can also be found in the article of Spanlang et al [87].…”