↓ Skip to main content

The time between intention and action affects the experience of action

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 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 time between intention and action affects the experience of action
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00366
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mikkel C. Vinding, Mads Jensen, Morten Overgaard

Abstract

We present a study investigating how the delay between the intention to act and the following action, influenced the experience of action. In experiments investigating sense of agency and experience of action, the contrast is most often between voluntary and involuntary actions. It is rarely asked whether different types of intentions influence the experience of action differently. To investigate this we distinguished between proximal intentions (i.e., intentions for immediate actions) and delayed intentions (i.e., intentions with a temporal delay between intention and action). The distinction was implemented in an intentional binding paradigm, by varying the delay between the time where participants formed the intention to act and the time at which they performed the action. The results showed that delayed intentions were followed by a stronger binding effect for the tone following the action compared to proximal intentions. The actions were reported to have occurred earlier for delayed intentions than for proximal intentions. This effect was independent of the binding effect usually found in intentional binding experiments. This suggests that two perceptual shifts occurred in the contrast between delayed intentions and proximal intentions: The first being the binding effect, the second a general shift in the perceived time of action. Neither the stronger binding effect for tone, nor the earlier reports of action, differed across delays for delayed intentions. The results imply that delayed intentions and proximal intentions have a different impact on the experience of action.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
France 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
Japan 1 2%
Unknown 60 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 26%
Researcher 13 20%
Student > Master 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 7 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 30 46%
Neuroscience 7 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 5%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 10 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 05 September 2023.
All research outputs
#7,187,574
of 24,938,276 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,897
of 7,584 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,105
of 270,114 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#74
of 181 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,938,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,584 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
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 270,114 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 181 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 59% of its contemporaries.