Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42848052›Full record

ArticlePsychological research2026

Is timing everything? Age-related differences in the use of temporal agency cues.

Victoria K E Bart, Martina Rieger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological research, 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.

Victoria K E BartInstitute of Psychology, UMIT TIROL - Private University for Health Sciences, Hall in Tirol, Austria. victoria.bart@umit-tirol.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1797-6208
Martina RiegerInstitute of Psychology, UMIT TIROL - Private University for Health Sciences, Hall in Tirol, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2421-296X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sense of agency (SoA) is the subjective experience of controlling one's own actions and their effects. To infer SoA people rely, among other cues, on temporal cues such as temporal contiguity (i.e. the closeness in time between action and effect) and temporal expectation (i.e. the match between expected and actual timing of an effect). We investigated whether the use of temporal cues and their interplay differ between younger (18-28 years) and older (65-75 years) adults. In the experiment, participants first completed adaptation blocks to form expectations regarding the timing of an effect. In adaptation blocks, actions were followed either by immediate (immediate effect condition) or by delayed (delayed effect condition) effects. In subsequent test blocks, the action-effect delay was varied, and participants SoA over the effect was assessed. Across both age groups, SoA increased, the more the timing of the actual effect corresponded to the expected effect, indicating that temporal expectation is used as primary agency cue. However, in younger (but not in older) adults, the change in SoA as a function of delay was steeper in the immediate effect condition than in the delayed effect condition. This may indicate that temporal contiguity and temporal expectation have reinforced each other in the immediate effect condition but counteracted each other in the delayed effect condition. Thus, whereas both age groups primarily rely on temporal expectation, younger adults may additionally integrate temporal contiguity when inferring SoA.

Indexed as

AgingCuesSense of AgencyTime PerceptionAdolescentAdultAgedAge FactorsFemaleHumansMaleYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID42848052
PMCPMC13649795

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.