Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41909569›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026

Intentional binding reflects pair dynamics and sense of agency in embodied joint action in human-human dyads but not in human-computer dyads.

Felix Woolford, Keisuke Suzuki

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. 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

2 authors.

Felix WoolfordCenter for Human Nature, Artificial Intelligence, and Neuroscience (CHAIN), Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.
Keisuke SuzukiCenter for Human Nature, Artificial Intelligence, and Neuroscience (CHAIN), Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intentional binding has been proposed as an implicit measure of shared sense of agency in joint action, yet it remains unclear whether it distinguishes between individual and different forms of joint control. We compared intentional binding across individual action, human-computer joint control, and human-human joint control in a physically coupled button-pressing task using haptic feedback devices. Binding magnitude was analyzed both intra-subjectively across conditions and inter-subjectively in relation to reported sense of agency and movement dynamics. Contrary to predictions from the we agency literature, we found no intra-subjective main effect of partner type on binding magnitude. However, within human-human dyads, participants who reported a stronger sense of agency exhibited stronger binding effects, corresponding to emergent leader-follower dynamics in their movement trajectories. No comparable relationship was observed in human-computer interactions. These findings suggest that temporal binding effects primarily reflect sensorimotor predictability rather than intentionality or social context per se. While binding alone does not provide a sufficient marker of "human-like" agency in artificial systems, it may reflect the distribution of predictive control within a dyad and thus serve as a quantifiable signature of how effectively partners co-regulate their actions.

Indexed as

embodied cognitionhuman-robot interactionintentional bindingjoint actionsense of agencywe-agency

Identifiers

PMID41909569
PMCPMC13017952

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.