The effect of military training on the sense of agency and outcome processing

Abstract

Armed forces often rely on strict hierarchical organization, where people are required to follow orders. In two cross-sectional studies, we investigate whether or not working in a military context influences the sense of agency and outcome processing, and how different durations (junior cadets vs senior cadets) and types (cadets vs privates) of military experience may modulate these effects. Participants could administer painful electrical shocks to a 'victim' in exchange for money, either by their own free choice, or following orders of the experimenter. Results indicate that working in a strictly hierarchical structure may have a generalized negative impact on one's own sense of agency and outcome processing by reducing it, even when participants could freely decide their action. However, trained officers showed an enhanced sense of agency and outcome processing. This study offers insights on the potential for training the sense of agency and outcome processing.

My voice therefore I spoke: sense of agency over speech enhanced in hearing self-voice

“…3, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.39) and a significant main effect of speech-feedback interval ( F (1.22, 34.3) = 245.9, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.90, Greenhouse-Geisser corrected) but no significant interaction ( F (2.74, 76.68) = 0.76, p = 0.51, η p 2 = 0.026, Greenhouse-Geisser corrected). Note that the effect size of the pitch ( η p 2 = 0.39) is comparable to or larger than the effect sizes in the previous studies which examined participants’ estimated action-outcome intervals (Barlas et al, 2017; Caspar et al, 2015; Caspar et al, 2016; Caspar et al, 2020). Following the previous study on intentional binding (Suzuki et al, 2019), we calculated the mean of the estimated intervals across the three speech-feedback intervals to examine a simple effect of pitch (Figure 2C; see also Supplementary Figure 1 for each speech-feedback interval).…”

“…We first examined an action-outcome causality perceived during speech by measuring the temporal compression of a perceived interval between speech and voice feedback. This compression, termed the intentional binding effect, is often used as an implicit measure of the sense of agency (Caspar et al, 2016; Caspar et al, 2020; Haggard, 2017; Haggard et al, 2002; Moore & Obhi, 2012; Yoshie & Haggard, 2013; Yoshie & Haggard, 2017). The sensory processing for detecting action (i.e., speech) and outcome (i.e., feedback voice) timings is considered independently of the judgment of whether the feedback voice is one’s own (i.e., self-voice identity judgment).…”

The obedient mind and the volitional brain: A neural basis for preserved sense of agency and sense of responsibility under coercion

“…It’s important to note that [ 17 ] used explicit judgments of authorship related to causality (i.e. ‘Did you cause this event?’), which differ from judgements of controllability [ 18 , 20 ] or responsibility [ 21 , 22 ]. Thus, someone can be well aware that they caused an effect, but nevertheless feel a low sense of control, for example when trying to ride an unfamiliar bicycle.…”

Social Agency as a continuum

“…For example, when playing music on public transport, the normative behaviour is to use earphones as to not disturb others, whereas listening alone does not require that evaluation. This evaluative component has recently been found to be dissociable from feeling agency (Caspar, Lo Bue, Magalhães De Saldanha da Gama, Haggard, & Cleeremans, 2020 ), and can reduce self-responsibility when coerced to perform reprehensible actions. For example, when following an order to administer pain to another, less agency is experienced than when freely choosing to perform the same act (Caspar, Cleeremans, & Haggard, 2018 ).…”