Medial frontal negativity reflects advantageous inequality aversion of proposers in the ultimatum game: An ERP study

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.

Electrophysiological correlates of third-party punishment: ERP study

Human societies benefit from social norms that increase cooperation and support social order. Hence, the understanding of effective mechanisms enforcing norms is crucial. One of such mechanisms is "third-party punishment" (TPP) - a form of social punishment that could be delivered by a third-party, not directly affected by the actions of the norm violator. Previous electrophysiological studies (ERP) reported that perceived violations of norms evoked the medial frontal negativity in third-parties. The current study further probed the link between the medial frontal negativity (MFN) and actual TPP of norm violation, as it was not shown directly before. Participants played a dictator game as third-parties, being able to select different levels of punishment of an unfair violator's decisions. We replicated previous findings and showed the amplitude of the MFN correlated with the intensity of TPP (Fz, r = -0.516, p = 0.034, FCz, r = -0.509; p = 0.037). Overall, our findings further support the direct link between the MFN and the intensity of TPP.

Morality is Supreme: The Roles of Morality, Fairness and Group Identity in the Ultimatum Paradigm

Purpose

A large number of decision-making need to be carried out in the context of social interactions. Previous studies have demonstrated the impact of fairness perception, moral judgment, and group identity on decision-making. However, there is no clear conclusion as to how the effect of these factors existing simultaneously on decision-making and the extent to which these factors play a role.

Methods

We manipulated the moral quality of proposers to explore the issue of whether morality has an impact on fairness perception and manipulated the moral quality of proposer and responder simultaneously forming group identity to explore whether group identity has an impact on the effect of morality on fairness in decision-making.

Results

Participants displayed a higher acceptance rates for positive moral proposers than the negative moral proposers regardless of the fairness of the allocation of money (Experiment 1) and group identity (Experiment 2). However, the effect of group identity was working, though it partially supported the In-group Preference (Experiment 1 and Experiment 2 combined analysis). We hold that the group identity was influenced by morality.

Conclusion

When making an economic decision, morality has the supreme influence on individuals.

Self-interest is intuitive during opportunity (in)equity: Evidence from multivariate pattern analysis of electroencephalography data

Fairness is a remarkable preference for human society, involving both outcome and opportunity equity. Most previous studies have explored whether fairness itself or self-interest is intuitive during outcome (in)equity. However, intuition during outcome (in)equity can be affected by both fairness level and actual payoff. Since opportunity (in)equity is only affected by the fairness level, we explored only intuition during fairness by measuring event-related potential responses to opportunity (in)equity. Participants played a social non-competitive two-person choice game with advantage opportunity inequity (AI), opportunity equity (OE), and disadvantage opportunity inequity (DI). The behavioral results suggested an opportunity inequity bias, with greater feelings of fairness and pleasantness during OE than during AI and DI. However, multivariate pattern analysis of the event-related potential (ERP) data suggested that AI, OE, and DI can be significantly distinguished from each other in relatively early windows overlapping with early positive negativity (EPN), and AI and DI can be significantly further distinguished during a relatively late window overlapping with late positive potential (LPP). Moreover, the conventional ERP analysis found that EPN amplitudes were more negative for AI than for OE and DI, as well as for OE than for DI, suggesting a pleasure bias for increased self-interest. LPP amplitudes were greater for DI than for AI and OE, suggesting enhanced sensitivity to DI. These results suggest that self-interest is intuitive during opportunity (in)equity.

Social comparisons differentially affect fair and unfair processing in ultimatum bargaining

Several theoretical frameworks have attempted to illustrate the influence of social contexts on decision-making and well-being. Traditional economic models assume that absolute income is the crucial determinant of one's well-being, while the comparative models state that social comparisons influence well-being and decisions. Here we investigated the impact of social comparisons on decision-making using a modified three-player Ultimatum Game and ERP technique. We found two independent effects: First, social comparisons did not affect decision-making when a fair norm was enforced. Second, social comparisons affected fairness consideration for unfair offers only-responders were less likely to accept unfair offers in upward comparisons but more likely to accept unfair offers in downward comparisons. These results revealed that people were envy-free of fair offers while affected mainly by social comparisons when the equality norm was broken. Event-related brain potentials showed that in the early time window (260-320 ms), compared to fair offers, unfair offers elicited a larger negative-going medial frontal negativity (MFN) in upward than parallel and downward comparisons, and in the late stage (320-650 ms), compared to fair offers, unfair offers led to equally less positive-going P300 in upward and downward comparisons relative to parallel comparison. Although partly consistent with the relative standing assumption, both traditional economic models and comparative models require revision to account for the results.

You are excusable! Neural correlates of economic neediness on empathic concern and fairness perception

There is ample experimental evidence showing that the proposers' social role is related to individuals' fairness perception in the Ultimatum Game (UG). However, various social roles, e.g., degree of economic neediness, have different influences on fairness perception, yet it has not been well studied. In this study, we adapted the UG paradigm and recorded electroencephalography (EEG) to probe the neural signatures of whether and how the degree of neediness influences fairness perception. Behavioral results showed that responders are prone to accept unfair offers from proposers in need more than those who are not in need. At the brain level, MFN (medial frontal negativity) was more negative-going in response to unfair than fair offers for not-in-need proposers. In contrast, we found a reversed MFN difference response to unfair and fair offers for in-need proposers, showing a strongly pure altruistic phenomenon. Moreover, we found smaller P300 amplitude was induced in the proposer-in-need condition, compared with its counterpart, while a negative correlation between empathy rating and P300 amplitude in the proposer-in-need condition regardless of the offers' fairness. The current results indicate that the degree of neediness might reduce fairness perception by promoting the empathic concern toward the in-need proposers rather than decreasing the empathic concern for the not-in-need proposers.

The effect of money magnitude on unfair proposals and decisions in ultimatum and dictator games

To explore the effect of money magnitude in unfair decisions, participants accepted or rejected the allocation scheme proposed by the other participant/player in ultimatum games, or chose an allocation scheme to share a certain amount of money with the other participant/player in dictator games. The results show that in ultimatum games, as the amount of money increased, when the level of unfairness remained constant for unfair decisions, participants (responders) were increasingly likely to reject the unfair allocation scheme; however, in dictator games, as the amount of money increased, participants (proposers) allocated an increasing proportion of money to themselves. Thus, there is an effect of money magnitude in unfair decision processing. Participants’ economic decisions were not entirely based on a social fairness preference, and the amount of money involved had an important influence on their decisions about making or accepting unfair proposals.

Late Frontal Negativity Discriminates Outcomes and Intentions in Trust-Repayment Behavior

Altruism (a costly action that benefits others) and reciprocity (the repayment of acts in kind) differ in that the former expresses preferences about the outcome of a social interaction, whereas the latter requires, in addition, ascribing intentions to others. Interestingly, an individual's behavior and neurophysiological activity under outcome- versus intention-based interactions has not been compared directly using different endowments in the same subject and during the same session. Here, we used a mixed version of the Dictator and the Investment games, together with electroencephalography, to uncover a subject's behavior and brain activity when challenged with endowments of different sizes in contexts that call for an altruistic (outcome-based) versus a reciprocal (intention-based) response. We found that subjects displayed positive or negative reciprocity (reciprocal responses greater or smaller than that for altruism, respectively) depending on the amount of trust they received. Furthermore, a subject's late frontal negativity differed between conditions, predicting responses to trust in intentions-based trials. Finally, brain regions related with mentalizing and cognitive control were the cortical sources of this activity. Thus, our work disentangles the behavioral components present in the repayment of trust, and sheds light on the neural activity underlying the integration of outcomes and perceived intentions in human economic interactions.

Does unfairness sound wrong? A cross-domain investigation of expectations in music and social decision-making

This study was interested in investigating the existence of a shared psychological mechanism for the processing of expectations across domains. The literature on music and language shows that violations of expectations produce similar neural responses and violating the expectation in one domain may influence the processing of stimuli in the other domain. Like music and language, our social world is governed by a system of inherent rules or norms, such as fairness. The study therefore aimed to draw a parallel to the social domain and investigate whether a manipulation of melodic expectation can influence the processing of higher-level expectations of fairness. Specifically, we aimed to investigate whether the presence of an unexpected melody enhances or reduces participants' sensitivity to the violations of fairness and the behavioural reactions associated with these. We embedded a manipulation of melodic expectation within a social decision-making paradigm, whereby musically expected and unexpected stimuli will be simultaneously presented with fair and unfair divisions in a third-party altruistic punishment game. Behavioural and electroencephalographic responses were recorded. Results from the pre-planned analyses show that participants are less likely to punish when melodies are more unexpected and that violations of fairness norms elicit medial frontal negativity (MFN)-life effects. Because no significant interactions between melodic expectancy and fairness of the division were found, results fail to provide evidence of a shared mechanism for the processing of expectations. Exploratory analyses show two additional effects: (i) unfair divisions elicit an early attentional component (P2), probably associated with stimulus saliency, and (ii) mid-value divisions elicit a late MFN-like component, probably reflecting stimulus ambiguity. Future studies could build on these results to further investigate the effect of the cross-domain influence of music on the processing of social stimuli on these early and late components.

A review of neuroeconomic gameplay in psychiatric disorders

Abnormalities in social interaction are a common feature of several psychiatric disorders, aligning with the recent move towards using Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) to describe disorders in terms of observable behaviours rather than using specific diagnoses. Neuroeconomic games are an effective measure of social decision-making that can be adapted for use in neuroimaging, allowing investigation of the biological basis for behaviour. This review summarises findings of neuroeconomic gameplay studies in Axis 1 psychiatric disorders and advocates the use of these games as measures of the RDoC Affiliation and Attachment, Reward Responsiveness, Reward Learning and Reward Valuation constructs. Although research on neuroeconomic gameplay is in its infancy, consistencies have been observed across disorders, particularly in terms of impaired integration of social and cognitive information, avoidance of negative social interactions and reduced reward sensitivity, as well as a reduction in activity in brain regions associated with processing and responding to social information.

Social decision-making in the brain: Input-state-output modelling reveals patterns of effective connectivity underlying reciprocal choices

During social interactions, decision‐making involves mutual reciprocity—each individual's choices are simultaneously a consequence of, and antecedent to those of their interaction partner. Neuroeconomic research has begun to unveil the brain networks underpinning social decision‐making, but we know little about the patterns of neural connectivity within them that give rise to reciprocal choices. To investigate this, the present study measured the behaviour and brain function of pairs of individuals (N = 66) whilst they played multiple rounds of economic exchange comprising an iterated ultimatum game. During these exchanges, both players could attempt to maximise their overall monetary gain by reciprocating their opponent's prior behaviour—they could promote generosity by rewarding it, and/or discourage unfair play through retaliation. By adapting a model of reciprocity from experimental economics, we show that players' choices on each exchange are captured accurately by estimating their expected utility (EU) as a reciprocal reaction to their opponent's prior behaviour. We then demonstrate neural responses that map onto these reciprocal choices in two brain regions implicated in social decision‐making: right anterior insula (AI) and anterior/anterior‐mid cingulate cortex (aMCC). Finally, with behavioural Dynamic Causal Modelling, we identified player‐specific patterns of effective connectivity between these brain regions with which we estimated each player's choices with over 70% accuracy; namely, bidirectional connections between AI and aMCC that are modulated differentially by estimates of EU from our reciprocity model. This input‐state‐output modelling procedure therefore reveals systematic brain–behaviour relationships associated with the reciprocal choices characterising interactive social decision‐making.

A dual-fMRI investigation of the iterated Ultimatum Game reveals that reciprocal behaviour is associated with neural alignment

Dyadic interactions often involve a dynamic process of mutual reciprocity; to steer a series of exchanges towards a desired outcome, both interactants must adapt their own behaviour according to that of their interaction partner. Understanding the brain processes behind such bidirectional reciprocity is therefore central to social neuroscience, but this requires measurement of both individuals' brains during real-world exchanges. We achieved this by performing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) on pairs of male individuals simultaneously while they interacted in a modified iterated Ultimatum Game (iUG). In this modification, both players could express their intent and maximise their own monetary gain by reciprocating their partner's behaviour - they could promote generosity through cooperation and/or discourage unfair play with retaliation. By developing a novel model of reciprocity adapted from behavioural economics, we then show that each player's choices can be predicted accurately by estimating expected utility (EU) not only in terms of immediate payoff, but also as a reaction to their opponent's prior behaviour. Finally, for the first time we reveal that brain signals implicated in social decision making are modulated by these estimates of EU, and become correlated more strongly between interacting players who reciprocate one another.

Fourth-Party Evaluation of Third-Party Pro-social Help and Punishment: An ERP Study

Pro-social behaviors have been adequately studied by neuroscientists. However, few neural studies have focused on the social evaluation of pro-social behaviors, and none has compared the neural correlates of different pro-social decision evaluations. By fourth-party evaluation of third-party punishment/help dictator game paradigm, we explored the third-party pro-social behaviors and derived feedback-related negativity (FRN) from the electroencephalogram. Different from previous event-related potentials (ERP) studies, we simultaneously focused on two different third-party pro-social behaviors, which were called third-party help and third-party punishment. For the first time, we compared the different neural processes of fourth-party evaluation on third-party help and punishment. Behavioral results showed that fourth-party bystanders appreciated the help behavior of the third party even more than the punishment behavior. ERP results revealed that fourth-party bystanders’ FRN amplitudes were modulated by the third-party behaviors. Under the assignment condition (70:30) with help/punishment magnitude 45 and (90:10) with magnitude 80, the third-party help elicited a larger FRN than third-party punishment; whereas under the condition (90:10) with help/punishment magnitude 45, the difference between FRN amplitudes disappeared. These results indicated that fourth-party bystanders ultimately agreed more with helpful third parties; however, after they witnessed the norm violation, they expected the third parties to punish the norm violators immediately. This phenomenon appears only when the third-party actors can achieve justice between norm violators and victims.

The time course of neural responses to social versus non-social unfairness in the ultimatum game

The unfairness effects are always the hotspot within social psychology and cognitive neuroscience. However, people's neural responses to social versus non-social unfairness remain under-researched, especially about temporal features. We engaged participants in the Ultimatum Game to respond to human and computer proposers (representing social and non-social contexts respectively) and recorded their event-related potentials. The interactions elicited three components of interest: medial frontal negativity (MFN), late positive potential (LPP) and response related negativity (RRN). First, unfair human offers elicited larger MFN than unfair computer offers did, suggesting a greater perception of unfairness in the social context. Second, rejected unfair human offers elicited smaller LPP than rejected unfair computer offers did. This finding implies that the rejection to social unfairness could down-regulate the unfairness-aversive emotions. These two mechanisms explained the stronger resistance to social unfairness in behavioural results. Last, the RRN for unfairness rejections were larger than for fairness acceptances, but showed no variance to the two types of proposers, signifying a similar degree of response conflict behind rejections to social and non-social unfairness. These results of our exploratory study will be helpful in revealing the sociality effect on the perceptual, emotional and reappraisal processing during the unfairness response.

Give Me a Chance! Sense of Opportunity Inequality Affects Brain Responses to Outcome Evaluation in a Social Competitive Context: An Event-Related Potential Study

People are strongly motivated to pursue social equality during social interactions. Previous studies have shown that outcome equality influences the neural activities of monetary feedback processing in socioeconomic games; however, it remains unclear whether perception of opportunity equality affects outcome evaluation even when outcomes are maintained equal. The current study investigated the electrophysiological activities of outcome evaluation in different instructed opportunity equality conditions with event-related potentials (ERPs). Participants were asked to play a competitive dice game against an opponent to win money. Opportunity equality was manipulated in three conditions, depending on whether participants were allowed the opportunity to throw less, equal, or more dice compared to their opponents. Although participants received a winning outcome with approximately 50% chance in all equality conditions, they selectively exhibited sensitivity to the less-dice condition by reporting stronger feelings of unfairness and unpleasantness than in the equal and more-dice conditions. In line with the behavioral results, larger reward positivity amplitudes were elicited by the monetary outcome in the less-dice condition than in the other two conditions, reflecting intensified reward prediction error (RPE) signals under negative emotional arousal. Further, P3 amplitudes were enhanced following reward feedback only in the unequal conditions, perhaps due to the high-level motivational and affective processing associated with resolving conflict between social norms and self-interest. The present findings elucidate the complex temporal course of outcome evaluation processes in different opportunity equality conditions.

The effect of proprioceptive acuity variability on motor adaptation in older adults

Motor adaptation requires efficient integration of sensory information with predicted sensory consequences of one's own action. However, the effect of reduced sensory acuity on motor adaptation in humans remains to be further investigated. Here, we examined the variability of proprioceptive acuity during an arm-position matching task and the pattern of visuomotor adaptation in older and young adults, and determined the relationship between the two variables. The older adults, a known example of impaired proprioceptive acuity, exhibited greater trial-to-trial variability during the arm-position matching task as compared with the young adults. Furthermore, the older adults showed a slower rate of adaptation to a 30° visuomotor rotation during targeted reaching movements, as well as larger movement errors in the later phase of adaptation, than the young adults. Our correlation analyses indicated a negative association between the variability in proprioceptive acuity and the rate of visuomotor adaptation in the older adults; and no association was observed in the young adults. These findings point to a possibility that an increase in the variability of proprioceptive acuity due to aging may weaken the integration of predicted and actual sensory feedback, which in turn may result in poor visuomotor adaptation in older adults.