The experience of agency: an interplay between prediction and postdiction.
The experience of agency: an interplay between prediction and postdiction.
复制标题
DOI：
10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00127
复制
发表时间：
2013
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Voss M
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Synofzik M;Vosgerau G;Voss M
代理的经验，即我是我的行动的发起者的注册，是我们与世界互动的基本且持续的基础。虽然一些观点强调预测过程是中心机制（例如 C. Frith 的比较模型），但其他观点则强调事后推理（例如 D. Wegner 的事后推理观点）。基于越来越多的证据表明预测和后预测过程都有助于代理体验，我们在这里提出了一种统一但同时又简约的方法来协调这些帐户：预测和后预测过程都是由大脑根据最佳提示整合的原则进行整合的。根据这个框架，预测和事后过程各自充当作者身份线索，根据其在给定情况下的可用性和可靠性不断整合和加权。感觉运动和认知信号都可以作为预测线索（例如，基于运动命令的有效副本的内部预测或基于启动的认知预期）。类似地，其他感觉运动和认知线索都可以充当事后线索（例如，动作的视觉反馈或动作结果的情感效价）。这些线索的整合和权重可能不仅在环境和个体之间存在差异，而且在不同的受试者和疾病组之间也存在差异。例如，患有影响妄想的精神分裂症患者似乎较少依赖（可能不精确）动作的预测运动信号，而更多地依赖事后动作线索，例如视觉反馈，以及可能的动作结果的情感效价。因此，最佳线索整合的框架提供了一种有前途的方法，可以直接激发关于不同主题组的代理处理的各种可实验检验的假设。
The experience of agency, i.e., the registration that I am the initiator of my actions, is a basic and constant underpinning of our interaction with the world. Whereas several accounts have underlined predictive processes as the central mechanism (e.g., the comparator model by C. Frith), others emphasized postdictive inferences (e.g., post-hoc inference account by D. Wegner). Based on increasing evidence that both predictive and postdictive processes contribute to the experience of agency, we here present a unifying but at the same time parsimonious approach that reconciles these accounts: predictive and postdictive processes are both integrated by the brain according to the principles of optimal cue integration. According to this framework, predictive and postdictive processes each serve as authorship cues that are continuously integrated and weighted depending on their availability and reliability in a given situation. Both sensorimotor and cognitive signals can serve as predictive cues (e.g., internal predictions based on an efferency copy of the motor command or cognitive anticipations based on priming). Similarly, other sensorimotor and cognitive cues can each serve as post-hoc cues (e.g., visual feedback of the action or the affective valence of the action outcome). Integration and weighting of these cues might not only differ between contexts and individuals, but also between different subject and disease groups. For example, schizophrenia patients with delusions of influence seem to rely less on (probably imprecise) predictive motor signals of the action and more on post-hoc action cues like e.g., visual feedback and, possibly, the affective valence of the action outcome. Thus, the framework of optimal cue integration offers a promising approach that directly stimulates a wide range of experimentally testable hypotheses on agency processing in different subject groups.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
2.4
作者：
Dogge, Myrthel;Schaap, Marloes;Aarts, Henk
通讯作者：
Aarts, Henk
影响因子：
22.4
作者：
Hughes, Gethin;Desantis, Andrea;Waszak, Florian
通讯作者：
Waszak, Florian
影响因子：
9.2
作者：
Lindner, A;Thier, P;Leube, DT
通讯作者：
Leube, DT
影响因子：
3.2
作者：
Blakemore, SJ;Frith, CD;Wolpert, DM
通讯作者：
Wolpert, DM
影响因子：
64.8
作者：
Körding, KP;Wolpert, DM
通讯作者：
Wolpert, DM