Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40924211›Full record

ArticlePsychological research2025

Moderate manipulation to somatosensory feedback does not affect Libet-style intentional action.

Yu Hei Shum, Carl Michael Galang, Marcel Brass

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Yu Hei ShumBerlin School of Mind and Brain & Department of Psychology, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany. shumyuhe@hu-berlin.de.
Carl Michael GalangBerlin School of Mind and Brain & Department of Psychology, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Marcel BrassBerlin School of Mind and Brain & Department of Psychology, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The existence of free will has been called into question by Benjamin Libet's seminal experiment, who argued that our conscious decision is preceded by an unconscious decision reflected in the readiness potential (RP). Alternatively, it has been argue that the RP rather reflects a decision process in which different signals accumulate until they reach the intention threshold, at which point an agent experience their intention simultaneously. This raises the question what type of signal is accumulated given that no external information is provided. Recent studies suggest that various interoceptive signals, such as the respiratory and cardiac cycles, guide our arbitrary decisions. We hypothesized the somatosensory feedback from the afferent system could be another potential source, and tested this by inducing numbness in participants' hands. If somatosensory feedback is one source of information in arbitrary decisions, participants should take longer to reach the decision threshold. Contrary to our hypotheses, Bayesian analyses revealed decisive evidence supporting the null hypothesis. These findings suggest that somatosensory feedback may not substantially contribute to arbitrary decisions, and alternative explanations have been proposed to account for the results.

Indexed as

Contingent Negative VariationDecision MakingFeedback, SensoryIntentionAdultBayes TheoremFemaleHumansMaleYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID40924211
PMCPMC12420747

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.