Obedience induces agentic shifts by increasing the perceived time between own action and results.

The concept of 'agentic shift,' introduced by Stanley Milgram, suggests that obedience reduces the sense of agency. In a recent study simulating the seminal work of Milgram, Caspar et al., 2016 examined this idea in a financial harm context. They demonstrated that, compared to situations of voluntary decision-making, coercion increases the perceived time between action and outcomes-suggested as a marker of diminished agency. Importantly, in this study, participants were agent and victim (relying on a reciprocal relationship) and first experienced free choices, followed by forced choices. This diverts from Milgram's original study, where participants were no victims but only agents who were forced to harm. The current study replicates and extends findings from the 2016 study by Caspar et al. in an online meeting setting, where participants served only as agents-similar to the original Milgram studies-while controlling the order of free and forced choice blocks. Substantiating earlier findings, forced choices reduced temporal binding (increased time interval estimations) compared to free choices independent of the order. We briefly discuss the importance of replications of coercion effects on the sense of agency, particularly in online decision-making settings.