An fMRI investigation of the intention-outcome interactions in second- and third-party punishment

The Neurocomputational Mechanism Underlying Decision-Making on Unfairness to Self and Others

Fairness is a fundamental value in human societies, with individuals concerned about unfairness both to themselves and to others. Nevertheless, an enduring debate focuses on whether self-unfairness and other-unfairness elicit shared or distinct neuropsychological processes. To address this, we combined a three-person ultimatum game with computational modeling and advanced neuroimaging analysis techniques to unravel the behavioral, cognitive, and neural patterns underlying unfairness to self and others. Our behavioral and computational results reveal a heightened concern among participants for self-unfairness over other-unfairness. Moreover, self-unfairness consistently activates brain regions such as the anterior insula, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, spanning various spatial scales that encompass univariate activation, local multivariate patterns, and whole-brain multivariate patterns. These regions are well-established in their association with emotional and cognitive processes relevant to fairness-based decision-making. Conversely, other-unfairness primarily engages the middle occipital gyrus. Collectively, our findings robustly support distinct neurocomputational signatures between self-unfairness and other-unfairness.

Same allocation proposed by an individual or a group elicits distinct responses: Evidence from event-related potentials and neural oscillation

People tend to perceive the same information differently depending on whether it is expressed in an individual or a group frame. It has also been found that the individual (vs. group) frame of expression tends to lead to more charitable giving and greater tolerance of wealth inequality. However, little is known about whether the same resource allocation in social interactions elicits distinct responses depending on proposer type. Using the second-party punishment task, this study examined whether the same allocation from different proposers (individual vs. group) leads to differences in recipient behavior and the neural mechanisms. Behavioral results showed that reaction times were longer in the unfair (vs. fair) condition, and this difference was more pronounced when the proposer was the individual (vs. group). Neural results showed that proposer type (individual vs. group) influenced early automatic processing (indicated by AN1, P2, and central alpha band), middle processing (indicated by MFN and right frontal theta band), and late elaborative processing (indicated by P3 and parietal alpha band) of fairness in resource allocation. These results revealed more attentional resources were captured by the group proposer in the early stage of fairness processing, and more cognitive resources were consumed by processing group-proposed unfair allocations in the late stage, possibly because group proposers are less identifiable than individual proposers. The findings provide behavioral and neural evidence for the effects of "individual/group" framing leading to cognitive differences. They also deliver insights into social governance issues, such as punishing individual and/or group violations.

The science of justice: The neuropsychology of social punishment

The social punishment (SP) of norm violations has received much attention across multiple disciplines. However, current models of SP fail to consider the role of motivational processes, and none can explain the observed behavioral and neuropsychological differences between the two recognized forms of SP: second-party punishment (2PP) and third-party punishment (3PP). After reviewing the literature giving rise to the current models of SP, we propose a unified model of SP which integrates general psychological descriptions of decision-making as a confluence of affect, cognition, and motivation, with evidence that SP is driven by two main factors: the amount of harm (assessed primarily in the salience network) and the norm violator's intention (assessed primarily in the default-mode and central-executive networks). We posit that motivational differences between 2PP and 3PP, articulated in mesocorticolimbic pathways, impact final SP by differentially impacting the assessments of harm and intention done in these domain-general large-scale networks. This new model will lead to a better understanding of SP, which might even improve forensic, procedural, and substantive legal practices.

Time Pressure Weakens Social Norm Maintenance in Third-Party Punishment

Decision-making under time pressure may better reflect an individual's response preference, but few studies have examined whether individuals choose to be more selfish or altruistic in a scenario where third-party punishment is essential for maintaining social norms. This study used a third-party punishment paradigm to investigate how time pressure impacts on individuals' maintenance of behavior that follows social norms. Thirty-one participants observed a Dictator Game and had to decide whether to punish someone who made what was categorized as a high unfair offer by spending their own Monetary units to reduce that person's payoff. The experiment was conducted across different offer conditions. The study results demonstrated that reaction times were faster under time pressure compared with no time pressure. Time pressure was also correlated with less severe punishment. Specifically, participants were less likely to punish the dictator under time pressure compared with no time pressure when the offer was categorized as a high unfair. The findings suggested that individuals in these game conditions and under time pressure do not overcome their pro-selves and that time pressure weakens an individual's willingness to punish high unfair offers.

Dynamic causal modeling of cerebello-cerebral connectivity when sequencing trait-implying actions

Prior studies suggest that the cerebellum contributes to the prediction of action sequences as well as the detection of social violations. In this dynamic causal modeling study, we explored the effective connectivity of the cerebellum with the cerebrum in processing social action sequences. A first model aimed to explore functional cerebello-cerebral connectivity when learning trait/stereotype-implying action sequences. We found many significant bidirectional connectivities between mentalizing areas of the cerebellum and the cerebrum including the temporo-parietal junction (TPJ) and medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC). Within the cerebrum, we found significant connectivity between the right TPJ and the mPFC, and between the TPJ bilaterally. A second model aimed to investigate cerebello-cerebral connectivity when conflicting information arises. We found many significant closed loops between the cerebellum and cerebral mentalizing (e.g. dorsal mPFC) and executive control areas (e.g. medial and lateral prefrontal cortices). Additional closed loops were found within the cerebral mentalizing and executive networks. The current results confirm prior research on effective connectivity linking the cerebellum with mentalizing areas in the cerebrum for predicting social sequences, and extend it to cerebral executive areas for social violations. Overall, this study emphasizes the critical role of cerebello-cerebral connectivity in understanding social sequences.