↓ Skip to main content

The readiness potential reflects intentional binding

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
195 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The readiness potential reflects intentional binding
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00421
Pubmed ID
Authors

Han-Gue Jo, Marc Wittmann, Thilo Hinterberger, Stefan Schmidt

Abstract

When a voluntary action is causally linked with a sensory outcome, the action and its consequent effect are perceived as being closer together in time. This effect is called intentional binding. Although many experiments were conducted on this phenomenon, the underlying neural mechanisms are not well understood. While intentional binding is specific to voluntary action, we presumed that preconscious brain activity (the readiness potential, RP), which occurs before an action is made, might play an important role in this binding effect. In this study, the brain dynamics were recorded with electroencephalography (EEG) and analyzed in single-trials in order to estimate whether intentional binding is correlated with the early neural processes. Moreover, we were interested in different behavioral performance between meditators and non-meditators since meditators are expected to be able to keep attention more consistently on a task. Thus, we performed the intentional binding paradigm with 20 mindfulness meditators and compared them to matched controls. Although, we did not observe a group effect on either behavioral data or EEG recordings, we found that self-initiated movements following ongoing negative deflections of slow cortical potentials (SCPs) result in a stronger binding effect compared to positive potentials, especially regarding the perceived time of the consequent effect. Our results provide the first direct evidence that the early neural activity within the range of SCPs affects perceived time of a sensory outcome that is caused by intentional action.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 195 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 2%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 187 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 47 24%
Student > Master 28 14%
Researcher 23 12%
Student > Bachelor 20 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 8%
Other 32 16%
Unknown 30 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 69 35%
Neuroscience 38 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 5%
Computer Science 5 3%
Other 19 10%
Unknown 43 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 July 2014.
All research outputs
#15,302,478
of 22,758,248 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,263
of 7,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,711
of 229,147 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#201
of 248 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,248 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,138 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 229,147 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 248 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.