Abstract
Judgments of agency, our sense of control over our actions and the environment, are often assumed to be metacognitive. We examined this assumption at the computational level by comparing the effects of sensory noise on agency judgments to those on confidence judgements, which are widely accepted to be metacognitive in nature. In two tasks, participants rated agency, or confidence in a decision about their agency, over a virtual hand that tracked their movements, either synchronously or with a delay, under high and low noise. We compared the predictions of two computational models to participants’ ratings and found that agency ratings, unlike confidence, were best explained by a model involving no metacognitive noise estimates. We propose that agency judgments reflect first-order measures of the internal signal, without involving metacognitive computations, challenging the assumed link between the two cognitive processes.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
