↓ Skip to main content

Illusory Temporal Binding in Meditators

Overview of attention for article published in Mindfulness, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 Mendeley
Title
Illusory Temporal Binding in Meditators
Published in
Mindfulness, August 2016
DOI 10.1007/s12671-016-0583-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter Lush, Jim Parkinson, Zoltan Dienes

Abstract

We investigate conditions in which more accurate metacognition may lead to greater susceptibility to illusion and thus conditions under which mindfulness meditation may lead to less accurate perceptions. Specifically, greater awareness of intentions may lead to an illusory compression of time between a voluntary action and its outcome ("intentional binding"). Here, we report that experienced Buddhist mindfulness meditators rather than non-meditators display a greater illusory shift of the timing of an outcome toward an intentional action. Mindfulness meditation involves awareness of causal connections between different mental states, including intentions. We argue that this supports improvements in metacognition targeted at motor intentions. Changes in metacognitive ability may result in an earlier and less veridical experience of the timing of action outcomes either through increased access to sensorimotor pre-representations of an action outcome or by affording greater precision to action timing judgements. Furthermore, as intentional binding is an implicit measure of the sense of agency; these results also provide evidence that mindfulness meditators experience a stronger sense of agency.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 100 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 20%
Student > Master 19 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 11%
Researcher 8 8%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 21 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 50 50%
Neuroscience 5 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 4%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 28 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 December 2016.
All research outputs
#13,958,115
of 24,340,143 outputs
Outputs from Mindfulness
#846
of 1,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,762
of 374,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Mindfulness
#22
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,340,143 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,464 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 374,373 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.