Abstract:The relationship between emotion and decision-making is of significant interest in the field of scientific psychology as well as in economics research. The emotions that individuals experience for post-decisional outcomes are not only influenced by properties of the outcomes (e.g. magnitude, valence), but also by the paths of individuals’ (e.g., vs. inaction) to reach it. Considerable behavioral researches have claimed that emotional reactions to outcomes following decisions to act are typically more intense than are those following decisions not to act. This well-known phenomenon has been labeled ‘action effect’ (Landman, 1987, Kahneman and Tversky, 1982). Though numerous convergent studies on decision-making have reported this phenomenon, few have reached agreement on its cognitive mechanism. By simultaneously recording event-related potentials (ERPs) data from participants with different locus of control (internal versus external locus of control, ILC vs ELC ) engaged in a simple gambling task, the present study aimed to further investigate the role of attribution of responsibility in inducing the action effect. Fifteen ILC participants (7 males and 8 females, age18-25, M=20.69±2.28 years) and fourteen ELC participants (5 males and 9 females, age17-25, M=20.42±2.19years) took part in the experiment. The two groups were selected from 256 volunteers recruited from Southwest University in China with the Adult Nowicki-Strickland Internal-External Control Scale (ANSIECS). The participants in the experiment were all right-hand, had normal or corrected-to-normal vision and had no neurological or psychological disorders. Each participant signed a consent form prior to the experiments and was paid after the experiment, according their performance. The study was approved by the local academic committee. In this experimental task, participants were first presented with two choice options and were told that the computer would choose one of two options for them. Both choices were randomly associated with identical monetary gains and losses in each trial. Participants were asked to decide whether to keep the computer choice (inaction condition) or to choose the other one (action condition). Subsequently, a feedback conveying the outcomes of the two options (either gaining or losing money) was provided. By manipulating the types that depended on whether the participants followed the chosen options by the computer and the valence of the feedback in the gambling task, four conditions were included: inaction-gain; inaction-loss; action-gain; and action-loss. The behavioral data showed that, whatever the feedback outcomes were winning or losing, the emotions and responsibility experienced by the ILC participants for the feedback outcomes were not significantly different between following their and inaction; while the emotions and responsibility experienced by the ELC participants for the feedback outcomes following their were more intense than that following their inaction. Moreover, the FRNs and P300s elicited by the feedback outcomes following and inaction were no differences for the ILC participants, whereas the two ERP components elicited by the feedback outcomes following were both larger than that following inaction for the ELC participants. In short, the effect is not evident in ILC participants, but evident in EIC participants. Thus, it most likely that effect is induced by different degree of sense of responsibility to identical outcomes following variant behavior.

Influence of voluntary action and outcome valence on the sense of agency

How Disentangled Sense of Agency and Sense of Ownership Can Interact with Different Emotional Events on Stress Feelings

Punishing temporal judgement boosts sense of agency and modulates its underlying neural correlates

Action Selection and Simultaneously Presented Emotional Sound and Reward: Differential Effects on Implicit and Explicit Sense of Agency

Modulation of Attribution of Responsibility on ‘action Effect' and Its ERP Evidence

Rejecting unfairness enhances the implicit sense of agency in the human brain

Enhancing Agency in Individuals with Depressive Symptoms: The Roles of Effort, Outcome Valence, and Its Underlying Cognitive Mechanisms and Neural Basis

Neural Correlates of the Embodied Sense of Agency

Self-modulation of the sense of agency via neurofeedback enhances sensory-guided behavioral control

Motivational context determines the impact of aversive outcomes on mental effort allocation

Responsibility Modulates Neural Mechanisms of Outcome Processing: an ERP Study.

Context Modulates Perceived Fairness in Altruistic Punishment: Neural Signatures from ERPs and EEG Oscillations

Commanding or Being a Simple Intermediary: How Does It Affect Moral Behavior and Related Brain Mechanisms?

Intention Modulates the Effect of Punishment Threat in Norm Enforcement via the Lateral Orbitofrontal Cortex.

Neural correlations of the influence of self-relevance on moral decision-making involving a trade-off between harm and reward

Constraining the Sense of Agency in Human-Machine Interaction

Agency Modulates the Lateral and Medial Prefrontal Cortex Responses in Belief-Based Decision Making

Having control over the external world increases the implicit sense of agency

Previous experience of action-effect predictability and delay affect perceived agency and decision-making independently

Cultural background influences implicit but not explicit sense of agency for the production of musical tones

The anti-anxiety drug lorazepam changes implicit behaviors but not explicit evaluations of sense of agency under authoritative pressure: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study