Macquarie Centre for Cognitive Science, C5C Macquarie University, New South Wales 2109, Australia.
Conscious Cogn. 2012 Mar;21(1):30-45; discussion 55-8. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2010.08.005. Epub 2010 Sep 15.
I compare Frith and colleagues' influential comparator account of how the sense of agency is elicited to the multifactorial weighting model advocated by Synofzik and colleagues. I defend the comparator model from the common objection that the actual sensory consequences of action are not needed to elicit the sense of agency. I examine the comparator model's ability to explain the performance of healthy subjects and those suffering from delusions of alien control on various self-attribution tasks. It transpires that the comparator model needs case-by-case adjustment to deal with problematic data. In response to this, the multifactorial weighting model of Synofzik and colleagues is introduced. Although this model is incomplete, it is more naturally constrained by the cases that are problematic for the comparator model. However, this model may be untestable. I conclude that currently the comparator model approach has stronger support than the multifactorial weighting model approach.
我将弗里思和同事关于主体感如何被引发的有影响力的比较器理论与 Synofzik 和同事提倡的多因素权重模型进行了比较。我为比较器模型辩护，反对认为需要实际的行动感觉后果才能引发主体感的常见反对意见。我检查了比较器模型在各种自我归因任务中解释健康受试者和那些患有外星控制妄想的受试者表现的能力。事实证明，比较器模型需要针对特定情况进行调整，以处理有问题的数据。针对这一点，Synofzik 和同事的多因素权重模型被引入。尽管这个模型并不完整，但它更受比较器模型存在问题的案例的自然约束。然而，这个模型可能是不可检验的。我得出的结论是，目前比较器模型方法比多因素权重模型方法更有支持。
