The Influences of Role, Action Contribution, and Outcome Feedback on Individual and Joint Sense of Agency

IF 2.4 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Hongyuan Guo, Lihong Li, Lingyun Wang, Gaojie Yun, Fanli Jia
{"title":"The Influences of Role, Action Contribution, and Outcome Feedback on Individual and Joint Sense of Agency","authors":"Hongyuan Guo,&nbsp;Lihong Li,&nbsp;Lingyun Wang,&nbsp;Gaojie Yun,&nbsp;Fanli Jia","doi":"10.1111/cogs.70068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Individuals can experience both “I” based individual agency and “we” based joint agency during cooperative action. This study examined how three key factors, role identity (leader, follower), action contribution (high, equal, low), and outcome feedback (success, failure, none), influence these two forms of agency. Through three experiments using goal-directed joint tasks and subjective agency ratings, we systematically explored their main and interactive effects. In Experiment 1, without feedback, individual agency increased with greater action contributions and was stronger for leaders than for followers, while joint agency remained stable. Experiment 2 confirmed these effects, showing independent contributions of role and effort to individual agency but minimal effects on joint agency. Experiment 3 introduced outcome feedback, revealing that success amplified individual agency overall, while joint agency was shaped by complex interactions. Specifically, followers with high contributions reported stronger joint agency after success, whereas leaders with high contributions reported stronger joint agency after failure. These findings suggest that while individual agency is closely linked to leadership and effort, joint agency reflects a more dynamic integration of social roles, effort distribution, and outcome evaluation. The study highlights the importance of considering both conceptual (role-based) and sensorimotor (effort-based) cues in understanding agency. It also reveals how outcome feedback and attribution processes, such as self-serving bias, modulate perceptions of control and responsibility in cooperative contexts.</p>","PeriodicalId":48349,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Science","volume":"49 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cogs.70068","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Individuals can experience both “I” based individual agency and “we” based joint agency during cooperative action. This study examined how three key factors, role identity (leader, follower), action contribution (high, equal, low), and outcome feedback (success, failure, none), influence these two forms of agency. Through three experiments using goal-directed joint tasks and subjective agency ratings, we systematically explored their main and interactive effects. In Experiment 1, without feedback, individual agency increased with greater action contributions and was stronger for leaders than for followers, while joint agency remained stable. Experiment 2 confirmed these effects, showing independent contributions of role and effort to individual agency but minimal effects on joint agency. Experiment 3 introduced outcome feedback, revealing that success amplified individual agency overall, while joint agency was shaped by complex interactions. Specifically, followers with high contributions reported stronger joint agency after success, whereas leaders with high contributions reported stronger joint agency after failure. These findings suggest that while individual agency is closely linked to leadership and effort, joint agency reflects a more dynamic integration of social roles, effort distribution, and outcome evaluation. The study highlights the importance of considering both conceptual (role-based) and sensorimotor (effort-based) cues in understanding agency. It also reveals how outcome feedback and attribution processes, such as self-serving bias, modulate perceptions of control and responsibility in cooperative contexts.

角色、行动贡献和结果反馈对个体和联合代理感的影响
在合作行动中,个体可以体验到以“我”为基础的个体能动性和以“我们”为基础的共同能动性。本研究考察了角色认同(领导者、追随者)、行动贡献(高、相等、低)和结果反馈(成功、失败、无)这三个关键因素如何影响这两种形式的代理。通过使用目标导向联合任务和主观代理评级的三个实验,我们系统地探讨了它们的主要作用和交互作用。在实验1中,在没有反馈的情况下,个体能动性随着行动贡献的增加而增加,领导者能动性强于追随者能动性,而联合能动性则保持稳定。实验2证实了这些效应,表明角色和努力对个体代理的独立贡献,但对联合代理的影响很小。实验3引入了结果反馈,揭示了成功总体上放大了个体能动性,而共同能动性是由复杂的相互作用形成的。具体而言,高贡献的追随者在成功后报告了更强的联合代理,而高贡献的领导者在失败后报告了更强的联合代理。这些发现表明,虽然个人代理与领导和努力密切相关,但联合代理反映了社会角色、努力分配和结果评估的更动态的整合。该研究强调了在理解代理时同时考虑概念(基于角色)和感觉运动(基于努力)线索的重要性。它还揭示了结果反馈和归因过程,如自我服务偏见,如何调节合作背景下的控制和责任观念。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cognitive Science
Cognitive Science PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
8.00%
发文量
139
期刊介绍: Cognitive Science publishes articles in all areas of cognitive science, covering such topics as knowledge representation, inference, memory processes, learning, problem solving, planning, perception, natural language understanding, connectionism, brain theory, motor control, intentional systems, and other areas of interdisciplinary concern. Highest priority is given to research reports that are specifically written for a multidisciplinary audience. The audience is primarily researchers in cognitive science and its associated fields, including anthropologists, education researchers, psychologists, philosophers, linguists, computer scientists, neuroscientists, and roboticists.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信