Intention and foresight in deliberate actions: An ERP study

The distinction between intention and foresight is critical for law and morality. For example, a military officer deciding to bomb a target while foreseeing civilian casualties raises questions about whether these deaths were intended or merely foreseen. This study aimed to disentangle the neural correlates of intention and foresight using a novel paradigm. Twenty-five participants completed a task inspired by the game Frogger, where hitting objects could be desirable (earning points) or inconsequential. Outcomes varied by likelihood (high vs. low) and actuality (hit vs. miss), resulting in a 2×2×2 design: intention (present/absent) × outcome (hit/miss) × expectedness (expected/unexpected). Electroencephalography (EEG) revealed that feedback-related negativity (FRN) amplitude was larger when participants intended to hit objects, while the P3 potential increased for unexpected outcomes. However, neither signal exclusively reflected intention or foresight; the FRN also indexed expectedness, and the P3 reflected intention. To address this overlap, we used effect-matched spatial (EMS) filtering, which identified a widespread brain activity pattern that may better dissociate intention from foresight. These findings enhance our understanding of the neural processes underlying complex decision-making, with potential applications in ethical and legal frameworks.