Beyond revenge: neural and genetic bases of altruistic punishment

Cognitive and affective processes in children's third-party punishment

This study investigated how children's punishment affective states change over time, as well as when children begin to prioritise intentions over outcomes in their punishment decisions. Whereas most prior research sampled children from Anglo-America or Northwestern Europe, we tested 5- to 11-year-old children from Colombia and Spain (N = 123). We focused on punishment behaviour in response to ostensibly real moral transgressions, rather than punishment recommendations for hypothetical moral transgressions. We employed moral scenarios involving disloyalty (group-focused moral domain) and unfairness (individual-focused moral domain). Regarding punishment affective states, on average, children did not derive much enjoyment from administering punishment, nor did they anticipate that punishment would feel good. Thus, children did not make the same emotional forecasting error adults commonly commit. Regarding the cognitive integration of outcomes and intentions, children began to punish failed intentional transgressions more harshly than accidental transgression, in both disloyalty and unfairness scenarios, much earlier than in previous behavioural studies: around 7 years of age rather than in late adolescence. This could be due to the lower processing demands and higher intention salience of our paradigm. Exploratory analyses revealed that children showed higher concern for disloyalty than unfairness. Punishment of disloyalty remained relatively stable in severity with increasing age, while punishment of unfairness decreased in severity. This suggests that the relative importance of moral concerns for the individual vs. the group may shift because of culture-directed learning processes.

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.

Brain responses to self- and other- unfairness under resource distribution context: Meta-analysis of fMRI studies

Under resource distribution context, individuals have a strong aversion to unfair treatment not only toward themselves but also toward others. However, there is no clear consensus regarding the commonality and distinction between these two types of unfairness. Moreover, many neuroimaging studies have investigated how people evaluate and respond to unfairness in the abovementioned two contexts, but the consistency of the results remains to be investigated. To resolve these two issues, we sought to summarize existing findings regarding unfairness to self and others and to further elucidate the neural underpinnings related to distinguishing evaluation and response processes through meta-analyses of previous neuroimaging studies. Our results indicated that both types of unfairness consistently activate the affective and conflict-related anterior insula (AI) and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex/supplementary motor area (dACC/SMA), but the activations related to unfairness to self appeared stronger than those related to others, suggesting that individuals had negative reactions to both unfairness and a greater aversive response toward unfairness to self. During the evaluation process, unfairness to self activated the bilateral AI, dACC, and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), regions associated with unfairness aversion, conflict, and cognitive control, indicating reactive, emotional and automatic responses. In contrast, unfairness to others activated areas associated with theory of mind, the inferior parietal lobule and temporoparietal junction (IPL-TPJ), suggesting that making rational judgments from the perspective of others was needed. During the response, unfairness to self activated the affective-related left AI and striatum, whereas unfairness to others activated cognitive control areas, the left DLPFC and the thalamus. This indicated that the former maintained the traits of automaticity and emotionality, whereas the latter necessitated cognitive control. These findings provide a fine-grained description of the common and distinct neurocognitive mechanisms underlying unfairness to self and unfairness to others. Overall, this study not only validates the inequity aversion model but also provides direct evidence of neural mechanisms for neurobiological models of fairness.

EEG Correlates of Moral Decision-Making: Effect of Choices and Offers Types

BACKGROUND

Moral decision-making consists of a complex process requiring individuals to evaluate potential consequences of personal and social decisions, including applied organizational contexts.

METHODS

This research aims to investigate the behavioral (offer responses and reaction times, RTs) and electrophysiological (EEG) correlates underlying moral decision-making during three different choice conditions (professional fit, company fit, and social fit) and offers (fair, unfair, and neutral).

RESULTS

An increase of delta and theta frontal activity (related to emotional behavior and processes) and beta frontal and central activity (linked to cognitive and attentional processes) was found. A left beta, delta, and theta frontal activity was observed for fair offers in professional fit conditions, while increased right frontal delta and theta activity was found in response to unfair offers in company fit conditions. Also, an increase of left delta and theta parietal activity for unfair offers in social fit condition was detected. Finally, higher accepted responses were found for fair and neutral offers in professional and social fit conditions, with increased RTs for unfair offers suggesting decisions' cognitive load and complexity.

CONCLUSIONS

By revealing a greater involvement of left and right frontal areas in decision-making processes based on choices and offers, personal interest evaluations and emotional values, and of parietal areas in more prosocial and altruistic moral behavior, current findings provide information about the neural and behavioral correlates underlying company moral behavior.

No one is going to recess: How children evaluate collective and targeted punishment

This study examined children's responses to targeted and collective punishment. Thirty-six 4-5-year-olds and 36 6-7-year-olds (36 females; 54 White; data collected 2018-2019 in the United States) experienced three classroom punishment situations: Targeted (only transgressing student punished), Collective (one student transgressed, all students punished), and Baseline (all students transgressed, all punished). The older children evaluated collective punishment as less fair than targeted, whereas younger children evaluated both similarly. Across ages, children distributed fewer resources to teachers who administered collective than targeted punishment, and rated transgressors more negatively and distributed fewer resources to transgressors in Collective and Targeted than Baseline. These findings demonstrate children's increasing understanding of punishment and point to the potential impact of different forms of punishment on children's social lives.

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.

Norm Dynamics: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Social Norm Emergence, Persistence, and Change

Social norms are the glue that holds society together, yet our knowledge of them remains heavily intellectually siloed. This article provides an interdisciplinary review of the emerging field of norm dynamics by integrating research across the social sciences through a cultural-evolutionary lens. After reviewing key distinctions in theory and method, we discuss research on norm psychology-the neural and cognitive underpinnings of social norm learning and acquisition. We then overview how norms emerge and spread through intergenerational transmission, social networks, and group-level ecological and historical factors. Next, we discuss multilevel factors that lead norms to persist, change, or erode over time. We also consider cultural mismatches that can arise when a changing environment leads once-beneficial norms to become maladaptive. Finally, we discuss potential future research directions and the implications of norm dynamics for theory and policy.

Neurocomputational Substrates Underlying the Effect of Identifiability on Third-Party Punishment

The identifiable target effect refers to the preference for helping identified victims and punishing identifiable perpetrators compared with equivalent but unidentifiable counterparts. The identifiable target effect is often attributed to the heightened moral emotions evoked by identified targets. However, the specific neurocognitive processes that mediate and/or modulate this effect remain largely unknown. Here, we combined a third-party punishment game with brain imaging and computational modeling to unravel the neurocomputational underpinnings of the identifiable transgressor effect. Human participants (males and females) acted as bystanders and punished identified or anonymous wrongdoers. Participants were more punitive toward identified wrongdoers than anonymous wrongdoers because they took a vicarious perspective of victims and adopted lower reference points of inequity (i.e., more stringent norms) in the identified context than in the unidentified context. Accordingly, there were larger activity of the ventral anterior insula, more distinct multivariate neural patterns in the dorsal anterior insula and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, and lower strength between ventral anterior insula and dorsolateral PFC and between dorsal anterior insula and ventral striatum connectivity in response to identified transgressors than anonymous transgressors. These findings implicate the interplay of expectancy violations, emotions, and self-interest in the identifiability effect. Last, individual differences in the identifiability effect were associated with empathic concern/social dominance orientation, activity in the precuneus/cuneus and temporo-parietal junction, and intrinsic functional connectivity of the dorsolateral PFC. Together, our work is the first to uncover the neurocomputational processes mediating identifiable transgressor effect and to characterize psychophysiological profiles modulating the effect.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT The identifiable target effect, more help to identified victims or stronger punishment to identifiable perpetrators, is common in daily life. We examined the neurocomputational mechanisms mediating/modulating the identifiability effect on third-party punishment by bridging literature from economics and cognitive neuroscience. Our findings reveal that identifiable transgressor effect is mediated by lower reference points of inequity (i.e., more stringent norms), which might be associated with a stronger involvement of the emotion processes and a weaker engagement of the analytic/deliberate processes. Furthermore, personality traits, altered brain activity, and intrinsic functional connectivity contribute to the individual variance in the identifiability effect. Overall, our study advances the understanding of the identifiability effect by shedding light on its component processes and modulating factors.

Children endorse deterrence motivations for third-party punishment but derive higher enjoyment from compensating victims

Children's punishment behavior may be driven by both retribution and deterrence, but the potential primacy of either motive is unknown. Moreover, children's punishment enjoyment and compensation enjoyment have never been directly contrasted. Here, British, Colombian, and Italian 7- to 11-year-old children (N = 123) operated a Justice System in which they viewed different moral transgressions in Minecraft, a globally popular video game, either face-to-face with an experimenter or over the internet. Children could respond to transgressions by punishing transgressors and compensating victims. The purpose of the system was framed in terms of retribution, deterrence, or compensation between participants. Children's performance, endorsement, and enjoyment of punishment and compensation were measured, along with their endorsement of retribution versus deterrence as punishment justifications, during and/or after justice administration. Children overwhelmingly endorsed deterrence over retribution as their punishment justification irrespective of age. When asked to reproduce the presented frame in their own words, children more reliably reproduced the deterrence frame rather than the retribution frame. Punishment enjoyment decreased while compensation enjoyment increased over time. Despite enjoying compensation more, children preferentially endorsed punishment over compensation, especially with increasing age and transgression severity. Reported deterrent justifications, superior reproduction of deterrence framing, lower enjoyment of punishment than of compensation, and higher endorsement of punishment over compensation together suggest that children felt that they ought to mete out punishment as a means to deter future transgressions. Face-to-face and internet-mediated responses were not distinguishable, supporting a route to social psychology research with primary school-aged children unable to physically visit labs.

The satisfaction is mine: revenge seeking following extrinsic reward

The extrinsic reward should impede revenge-seeking if revenge is solely driven by the desire to feel gratified. Study 1 (N = 114) showed that satisfaction from receiving monetary compensation decreased thinking about getting back at the provocateur. However, Study 2 (N = 213) found that insulted participants aggressed against their partners despite fulfillment from receiving the unexpected monetary reward. This evidence indicates that gratification is insufficient to impede revenge following provocation, suggesting that avengers want to feel pleasure when retaliating and want to balance the scales by sending offenders a message.

The needs of the many: Exploring associations of personality with third-party judgments of public health-related utilitarian rule violations

Safeguarding the rights of minorities is crucial for just societies. However, there are conceivable situations where minority rights might seriously impede the rights of the majority. Favoring the minority in such cases constitutes a violation of utilitarian principles. To explore the emotional, cognitive, and punitive responses of observers of such utilitarian rule transgressions, we conducted an online study with 1004 participants. Two moral scenarios (vaccine policy and epidemic) were rephrased in the third-party perspective. In both public health-related scenarios, the protagonist opted against the utilitarian option, which resulted in more fatalities in total, but avoided harm to a minority. Importantly, in vaccine policy, members of the minority cannot be identified beforehand and thus harm to them would have been rather accidental. Contrariwise, in epidemic, minority members are identifiable and would have needed to be deliberately selected. While the majority of participants chose not to punish the scenarios' protagonists at all, 30.1% judged that protecting the minority over the interests of the majority when only accidental harm would have occurred (vaccine policy) was worthy of punishment. In comparison, only 11.2% opted to punish a protagonist whose decision avoided deliberately selecting (and thus harming) a minority at the cost of the majority (epidemic). Emotional responses and appropriateness ratings paralleled these results. Furthermore, complex personality × situation interactions revealed the influence of personality features, i.e., trait psychopathy, empathy, altruism, authoritarianism, need for cognition and faith in intuition, on participants' responses. The results further underscore the need to consider the interaction of situational features and inter-individual differences in moral decisions and sense of justice.

Brain responses in aggression-prone individuals: A systematic review and meta-analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies of anger- and aggression-eliciting tasks

Reactive aggression in response to perceived threat or provocation is part of humans' adaptive behavioral repertoire. However, high levels of aggression can lead to the violation of social and legal norms. Understanding brain function in individuals with high levels of aggression as they process anger- and aggression-eliciting stimuli is critical for refining explanatory models of aggression and thereby improving interventions. Three neurobiological models of reactive aggression - the limbic hyperactivity, prefrontal hypoactivity, and dysregulated limbic-prefrontal connectivity models - have been proposed. However, these models are based on neuroimaging studies involving mainly non-aggressive individuals, leaving it unclear which model best describes brain function in those with a history of aggression. We conducted a systematic literature search (PubMed and Psycinfo) and Multilevel Kernel Density meta-analysis (MKDA) of nine functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies (eight included in the between-group analysis [i.e., aggression vs. control groups], five in the within-group analysis). Studies examined brain responses to tasks putatively eliciting anger and aggression in individuals with a history of aggression alone and relative to controls. Individuals with a history of aggression exhibited greater activity in the superior temporal gyrus and in regions comprising the cognitive control and default mode networks (right posterior cingulate cortex, precentral gyrus, precuneus, right inferior frontal gyrus) during reactive aggression relative to baseline conditions. Compared to controls, individuals with a history of aggression exhibited increased activity in limbic regions (left hippocampus, left amygdala, left parahippocampal gyrus) and temporal regions (superior, middle, inferior temporal gyrus), and reduced activity in occipital regions (left occipital cortex, left calcarine cortex). These findings lend support to the limbic hyperactivity model in individuals with a history of aggression, and further indicate altered temporal and occipital activity in anger- and aggression-eliciting conditions involving face and speech processing.

A novel approach to measure brain-to-brain spatial and temporal alignment during positive empathy

Empathy is defined as the ability to vicariously experience others' suffering (vicarious pain) or feeling their joy (vicarious reward). While most neuroimaging studies have focused on vicarious pain and describe similar neural responses during the observed and the personal negative affective involvement, only initial evidence has been reported for the neural responses to others' rewards and positive empathy. Here, we propose a novel approach, based on the simultaneous recording of multi-subject EEG signals and exploiting the wavelet coherence decomposition to measure the temporal alignment between ERPs in a dyad of interacting subjects. We used the Third-Party Punishment (TPP) paradigm to elicit the personal and vicarious experiences. During a positive experience, we observed the simultaneous presence in both agents of the Late Positive Potential (LPP), an ERP component related to emotion processing, as well as the existence of an inter-subject ERPs synchronization in the related time window. Moreover, the amplitude of the LPP synchronization was modulated by the presence of a human-agent. Finally, the localized brain circuits subtending the ERP-synchronization correspond to key-regions of personal and vicarious reward. Our findings suggest that the temporal and spatial ERPs alignment might be a novel and direct proxy measure of empathy.

Optimizing the social utility of judicial punishment: An evolutionary biology and neuroscience perspective

Punishment as a response to impairment of individual or group welfare may be found not only among humans but also among a wide range of social animals. In some cases, acts of punishment serve to increase social cooperation among conspecifics. Such phenomena motivate the search for the biological foundations of punishment among humans. Of special interest are cases of pro-social punishment of individuals harming others. Behavioral studies have shown that in economic games people punish exploiters even at a cost to their own welfare. Additionally, neuroimaging studies have reported activity during the planning of such punishment in brain areas involved in the anticipation of reward. Such findings hint that there is an evolutionarily honed basic drive to punish social offenders. I argue that the transfer of punishment authority from the individual to the group requires that social offenders be punished as a public good, even if such punishment is not effective as retribution or deterrent. Furthermore, the social need for punishment of offenders has implications for alternatives to incarceration, publicity of punishment, and judicial structure.

Decision neuroscience and neuroeconomics: Recent progress and ongoing challenges

In the past decade, decision neuroscience and neuroeconomics have developed many new insights in the study of decision making. This review provides an overarching update on how the field has advanced in this time period. Although our initial review a decade ago outlined several theoretical, conceptual, methodological, empirical, and practical challenges, there has only been limited progress in resolving these challenges. We summarize significant trends in decision neuroscience through the lens of the challenges outlined for the field and review examples where the field has had significant, direct, and applicable impacts across economics and psychology. First, we review progress on topics including reward learning, explore-exploit decisions, risk and ambiguity, intertemporal choice, and valuation. Next, we assess the impacts of emotion, social rewards, and social context on decision making. Then, we follow up with how individual differences impact choices and new exciting developments in the prediction and neuroforecasting of future decisions. Finally, we consider how trends in decision-neuroscience research reflect progress toward resolving past challenges, discuss new and exciting applications of recent research, and identify new challenges for the field. This article is categorized under: Psychology > Reasoning and Decision Making Psychology > Emotion and Motivation.

Ire and punishment: Incidental anger and costly punishment in children, adolescents, and adults

Why do children, adolescents, and adults engage in costly punishment to sanction fairness violations? Two studies investigated the differential impact of incidental anger on the costly punishment of 8-year-olds, 13-year-olds, and adults. Focusing on experimentally manipulated incidental anger allows for a causal investigation as to whether and how anger affects costly punishment in these age groups in addition to other motives such as inequity aversion. Study 1 (N = 210) assessed the effect of incidental anger (vs. a neutral emotion) on second-party punishment, where punishers were direct victims of fairness violations. Study 2 (N = 208) examined third-party punishment, where the punisher was an observer unaffected by the violation. Across ages, incidental anger increased the second-party punishment of unequal offers but not equal offers. Thus, anger seems to play a causal role in the punishment of unfairness when fairness violations are self-relevant. As predicted, adults' third-party punishment of unequal offers was higher in the incidental anger condition than in the neutral emotion condition. Children's third-party punishment of unfairness was not affected by the emotion condition, but incidental anger increased adolescents' third-party punishment across offers. Overall, our data suggest that the association between anger and costly punishment is based on the self-relevance of the violation. In third-party situations, where unfairness does not affect the self, social-cognitive processes that develop well into adulthood, such as emotional appraisals, might be necessary for third parties to engage in costly punishment.

Neural Correlates of Successful Costly Punishment in the Ultimatum Game on a Trial-by-Trial Basis

Costly punishment describes decisions of an interaction partner to punish an opponent for violating rules of fairness at the expense of personal costs. Here, we extend the interaction process by investigating the impact of a socio-emotional reaction of the opponent in response to the punishment that indicates whether punishment was successful or not. In a modified Ultimatum game, emotional facial expressions of the proposer in response to the decision of the responder served as feedback stimuli. We found that both honored reward following acceptance of an offer (smiling compared to neutral facial expression) and successful punishment (sad compared to neutral facial expression) elicited a reward positivity, indicating that punishment was the intended outcome. By comparing the pattern of results with a probabilistic learning task, we show that the reward positivity on sad facial expressions was specific for the context of costly punishment. Additionally, acceptance rates on a trial-by-trial basis were altered according to P3 amplitudes in response to the emotional facial reaction of the proposer. Our results are in line with the concept of costly punishment as an intentional act following norm-violating behavior. Socio-emotional stimuli have an important influence on the perception and behavior in economic bargaining.

To Blame or Not? Modulating Third-Party Punishment with the Framing Effect

People as third-party observers, without direct self-interest, may punish norm violators to maintain social norms. However, third-party judgment and the follow-up punishment might be susceptible to the way we frame (i.e., verbally describe) a norm violation. We conducted a behavioral and a neuroimaging experiment to investigate the above phenomenon, which we call the "third-party framing effect". In these experiments, participants observed an anonymous perpetrator deciding whether to keep her/his economic benefit while exposing a victim to a risk of physical pain (described as "harming others" in one condition and "not helping others" in the other condition), then they had a chance to punish that perpetrator at their own cost. Our results showed that the participants were more willing to execute third-party punishment under the harm frame compared to the help frame, manifesting a framing effect. Self-reported anger toward perpetrators mediated the relationship between empathy toward victims and the framing effect. Meanwhile, activation of the insula mediated the relationship between mid-cingulate cortex activation and the framing effect; the functional connectivity between these regions significantly predicted the size of the framing effect. These findings shed light on the psychological and neural mechanisms of the third-party framing effect.

The prefrontal cortex and (uniquely) human cooperation: a comparative perspective

Humans have an exceptional ability to cooperate relative to many other species. We review the neural mechanisms supporting human cooperation, focusing on the prefrontal cortex. One key feature of human social life is the prevalence of cooperative norms that guide social behavior and prescribe punishment for noncompliance. Taking a comparative approach, we consider shared and unique aspects of cooperative behaviors in humans relative to nonhuman primates, as well as divergences in brain structure that might support uniquely human aspects of cooperation. We highlight a medial prefrontal network common to nonhuman primates and humans supporting a foundational process in cooperative decision-making: valuing outcomes for oneself and others. This medial prefrontal network interacts with lateral prefrontal areas that are thought to represent cooperative norms and modulate value representations to guide behavior appropriate to the local social context. Finally, we propose that more recently evolved anterior regions of prefrontal cortex play a role in arbitrating between cooperative norms across social contexts, and suggest how future research might fruitfully examine the neural basis of norm arbitration.

A preference to learn from successful rather than common behaviours in human social dilemmas

Human cooperation is often claimed to be special and requiring explanations based on gene-culture coevolution favouring a desire to copy common social behaviours. If this is true, then individuals should be motivated to both observe and copy common social behaviours. Previous economic experiments, using the public goods game, have suggested individuals' desire to sacrifice for the common good and to copy common social behaviours. However, previous experiments have often not shown examples of success. Here we test, on 489 participants, whether individuals are more motivated to learn about, and more likely to copy, either common or successful behaviours. Using the same social dilemma and standard instructions, we find that individuals were primarily motivated to learn from successful rather than common behaviours. Consequently, social learning disfavoured costly cooperation, even when individuals could observe a stable, pro-social level of cooperation. Our results call into question explanations for human cooperation based on cultural evolution and/or a desire to conform with common social behaviours. Instead, our results indicate that participants were motivated by personal gain, but initially confused, despite receiving standard instructions. When individuals could learn from success, they learned to cooperate less, suggesting that human cooperation is maybe not so special after all.

Who initiates punishment, who joins punishment? Disentangling types of third-party punishers by neural traits

The act of punishing unfair behavior by unaffected observers (i.e., third‐party punishment) is a crucial factor in the functioning of human societies. In everyday life, we see different types of individuals who punish. While some individuals initiate costly punishment against an unfair person independently of what other observers do (independent punishers), others condition their punishment engagement on the presence of another person who punishes (conditional punishers). Still others do not want to partake in any sort of punishment (nonpunishers). Although these distinct behavioral types have a divergent impact on human society, the sources of heterogeneity are poorly understood. We present novel laboratory evidence on the existence of these three types. We use anatomical brain characteristics in combination with stated motives to characterize these types. Findings revealed that independent punishers have larger gray matter volume in the right temporo‐parietal junction compared to conditional punishers and nonpunishers, an area involved in social cognition. Conditional punishers are characterized by larger gray matter volume in the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, a brain area known to be involved in behavioral control and strategic reasoning, compared to independent punishers and nonpunishers. Finally, both independent punishers and nonpunishers are characterized by larger gray matter volume in an area involved in the processing of social and monetary rewards, that is, the bilateral caudate. By using a neural trait approach, we were able to differentiate these three types clearly based on their neural signatures, allowing us to shed light on the underlying psychological mechanisms.

Moral Conflict in Economic Decision Making: The Role of the Anterior Cingulate Cortex-Striatum Pathway

The present study combined a novel hypothetical investment game with functional magnetic resonance imaging to examine how moral conflict biases our real decision preference when it is not obvious or explicitly presented. Investment projects were chosen based on their prior subjective morality ratings to fit into 2 categories: a high level of moral conflict (HMC) or a low level of moral conflict (LMC). Participants were instructed to invest high or low amounts of capital into different projects. Behavioral and neural responses during decision making were recorded and compared. Behaviorally, we observed a significant decision bias such that investments were lower for HMC projects than for LMC projects. At the neural level, we found that moral conflict-related activity in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) was higher in the HMC condition than in the LMC condition and that reward-related activity in bilateral striatum was lower. Dynamic causal modeling further suggested that the moral conflict detected in the ACC influenced final decisions by modulating the representation of subjective value through the ACC's connection to the reward system.

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

Second-party punishment (SPP) and third-party punishment (TPP) are two basic forms of costly punishment that play an essential role in maintaining social orders. Despite scientific breakthroughs in understanding that costly punishment is driven by an integration of the wrongdoers' intention and the outcome of their actions, so far, few studies have compared the neurocognitive processes associated with the intention-outcome integration between SPP and TPP. Here, we combined economic exchange games measuring SPP and TPP with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to compare the neuropsychological architectures underlying the intention-outcome integration during one-shot interactions with anonymous partners across four types of norm violations (no norm, accidental, attempted, and intentional violations). Our behavioral findings showed that third-parties punished only attempted norm violations less frequently than second-parties. Our neuroimaging findings revealed higher activities in the right temporoparietal junction (TPJ) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) for attempted norm violations during TPP relative to SPP; more activities in these regions with less punishment frequency; and enhancement of functional connectivity of the right TPJ with the right dlPFC and dorsomedial PFC. Our findings demonstrated specific psychological and neural mechanisms of intention-outcome interactions between SPP and TPP -helping to unravel the complex neurocognitive processes of costly punishment.

Intrinsic functional connectivity of the frontoparietal network predicts inter-individual differences in the propensity for costly third-party punishment

Humans are motivated to give norm violators their just deserts through costly punishment even as unaffected third parties (i.e., third-party punishment, TPP). A great deal of individual variability exists in costly punishment; however, how this variability particularly in TPP is represented by the brain's intrinsic network architecture remains elusive. Here, we examined whether inter-individual differences in the propensity for TPP can be predicted based on resting-state functional connectivity (RSFC) combining an economic TPP game with task-free functional neuroimaging and a multivariate prediction framework. Our behavioral results revealed that TPP punishment increased with the severity of unfairness for offers. People with higher TPP propensity punished more harshly across norm-violating scenarios. Our neuroimaging findings showed RSFC within the frontoparietal network predicted individual differences in TPP propensity. Our findings contribute to understanding the neural fingerprint for an individual's propensity to costly punish strangers, and shed some light on how social norm enforcement behaviors are represented by the brain's intrinsic network architecture.

Wired to Punish? Electroencephalographic Study of the Resting-state Neuronal Oscillations Underlying Third-party Punishment

For over a decade, neuroimaging and brain stimulation studies have investigated neural mechanisms of third-party punishment, a key instrument for social norms enforcement. However, the neural dynamics underlying these mechanisms are still unclear. Previous electroencephalographic studies on third-party punishment have shown that inter-brain connectivity is linked to punishment behavior. However, no clear evidence was provided regarding whether the effect of inter-brain connectivity on third-party punishment is mediated by local neuronal states. In this study, we further investigate whether resting-state neuronal activity in the alpha frequency range can predict individual differences in third-party punishment. More specifically, we show that the global resting-state connectivity between the right dorsolateral prefrontal and right temporo-parietal regions is negatively correlated with the level of third-party punishment. Additionally, individuals with stronger local resting-state long-range temporal correlations in the right temporo-parietal cortices demonstrated a lower level of third-party punishment. Thus, our results further support the idea that global and local neuronal dynamics can contribute to individual differences in third-party punishment.

Acute psychosocial stress increases third-party helping but not punishing behavior

Despite extensive research on the effects of stress on the brain and behaviors, there is a debate whether stress promotes prosocial behaviors, especially acute stress due to intricate costly punishment in the ultimatum game. Therefore, the present study introduced an irrelevant third party to examine how acute stress and the triggered cortisol influence third parties' punishing and helping behaviors as more convincing altruistic behaviors. The 65 participants were exposed to a psychosocial stressor (n = 33) or a control condition (n = 32). Afterwards, two third-party intervention tasks (a token allocation task and criminal scenario judgment task) were completed, during which the participants, as an "irrelevant" third party, could choose whether to sacrifice their own interests to help the victim or punish the transgressor. Participants' affective states, heart rate, and salivary cortisol were repeatedly measured throughout the experiment. Results showed that acute stress can lead to more third-party helping behaviors but not more punishing behaviors. Specifically, participants under stress tended to transfer more monetary units to the victim in the token allocation task than the control-group participants, and they tended to help the victim in the scenario task. In contrast, there was no significant difference in punishing behavior between the stressed and control participants. These findings reveal that acute psychosocial stress triggers the "tend and befriend" response, which might reflect the prosocial intuition under acute stress.

The evolution of strongly-held group identities through agent-based cooperation

Identity fusion represents a strongly-held personal identity that significantly overlaps with that of a group, and is the current best explanation as to why individuals become empowered to act with extreme self-sacrifice for a group of non-kin. This is widely seen and documented, yet how identity fusion is promoted by evolution is not well-understood, being seemingly counter to the selfish pursuit of survival. In this paper we extend agent-based modelling to explore how and why identity fusion can establish itself in an unrelated population with no previous shared experiences. Using indirect reciprocity to provide a framework for agent interaction, we enable agents to express their identity fusion towards a group, and observe the effects of potential behaviours that are incentivised by a heightened fusion level. These build on the social psychology literature and involve heightened sensitivity of fused individuals to perceived hypocritical group support from others. We find that simple self-referential judgement and ignorance of perceived hypocrites is sufficient to promote identity fusion and this is easily triggered by a sub-group of the population. Interestingly the self-referential judgement that we impose is an individual-level behaviour with no direct collective benefit shared by the population. The study provides clues, beyond qualitative and observational studies, as to how hypocrisy may have established itself to reinforce the collective benefit of a fused group identity. It also provides an alternative perspective on the controversial proposition of group selection - showing how fluidity between an individual's reputation and that of a group may function and influence selection as a consequence of identity fusion.

Teams Do Inflict Costly Third-Party Punishment as Individuals Do: Experimental Evidence

Initiated by the seminal work of Fehr and Fischbacher (Evolution and Human Behavior (2004)), a large body of research has shown that people often take punitive actions towards norm violators even when they are not directly involved in transactions. This paper shows in an experimental setting that this behavioral finding extends to a situation where a pair of individuals jointly decides how strong a third-party punishment to impose. It also shows that this punishment behavior is robust to the size of social distance within pairs. These results lend useful insight since decisions in our everyday lives and also in courts are often made by teams.

Effect of Modulating Activity in the Right DLPFC on Revenge Behavior: Evidence From a Noninvasive Brain Stimulation Investigation

Revenge is common in our daily lives, and people feel good when engaging in revenge behavior. However, revenge behavior is a complex process and remains somewhat of a puzzle of human behavior. Neuroimaging studies have revealed that revenge behaviors are associated with activation of a neural network containing the anterior cingulate cortex, ventral striatum, inferior frontal gyrus, and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). Recent brain stimulation research using transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and transcranial magnetic stimulation has shown a causal relationship between brain regions and revenge behaviors, but the findings have been mixed. In the present study, we aimed to study whether stimulation in the DLPFC can change participants' revenge behavior in conditions where participants' wealth was taken away in different ways. We adapted the moonlighting game and designed a new paradigm. Our study revealed that revenge behavior increased following activation in the right DLPFC, suggesting that the right DLPFC plays an important role in overriding self-interest and retaliation. In addition, our results revealed that the right DLPFC is crucial in revenge behavior related to the motivation of invasion.

Morality and management: an oxymoron? fNIRS and neuromanagement perspective explain us why things are not like this

The neuroscience interest for moral decision-making has recently increased. To investigate the processes underlying moral behavior, this research aimed to investigate neurophysiological and behavioral correlates of decision-making in moral contexts. Specifically, functional Near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) allowed to record oxygenated (O2Hb) and deoxygenated (HHb) cerebral hemoglobin concentrations during different moral conditions (professional fit, company fit, social fit) and offers types (fair, unfair, neutral). Moreover, individuals' responses to offers types and reaction time (RTs) were considered. Specifically, from hemodynamic results emerged a difference in O2Hb and HHb activity according to moral conditions and offers types in different brain regions. In particular, O2Hb increase and a HHb decrease were observed in ventromedial and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (VMPFC, DLPFC) for fair offers in professional fit condition and in superior temporal sulcus (STS) for unfair offers in social fit condition. Moreover, an increase of left O2Hb activity in professional fit condition and in right VMPFC for unfair offers in company fit condition was observed. In addition, from behavioral results, an RTs increase in company and social fit condition for fair and unfair offers emerged. This study, therefore, shows the behavioral and neurophysiological correlates of moral decision-making that guide moral behavior in different context, such as company one.

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.

Altruistic Punishment and Impulsivity in Parkinson's Disease: A Social Neuroscience Perspective

Non-motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease (PD) are of increasing interest in clinical and psychological research. Disinhibition-the inability to inhibit inappropriate behavior-leads to social and emotional impairments, including impulsive behavior and disregard for social conventions and decision-making behavior. In recent years, the latter has been investigated using economic exchanges during social interactions. Altruistic punishment-to punish someone who violates group norms even if it foresees a personal cost-is one of the most useful and fruitful paradigms; it allows to maintain a cooperation system within social groups. Alterations of this cognitive ability negatively impact the quality of life of the individual and social stability. Social neuroscience has suggested association between impulsive behaviors and altruistic punishment. Neuroimaging research aimed at exploring functional networks and intrinsic functional connectivity went in this direction. To date, little is known about these issues in neurodegenerative diseases such as PD. Dopamine replacement treatment and dopamine-agonists have been associated with impulse-control disorder and impulsive-compulsive behavior able to affect social decision-making. Frontal-executive dysfunction determines an alteration of social functioning through a mechanism of subversion of online action-monitoring, which associates disinhibition with volition. Genetic polymorphisms, alterations of the nigro-striatal substance, and impairment in the medial prefrontal cortex and in the Default mode network (DMN) seem to be able to explain these mechanisms. This theoretical perspective article aims to present these topics in order to encourage an interdisciplinary discussion capable of generating new research and developing rehabilitative intervention to improve social decision-making in PD patients.

The emerging neuroscience of social punishment: Meta-analytic evidence

Social punishment (SOP)-third-party punishment (TPP) and second-party punishment (SPP)-sanctions norm-deviant behavior. The hierarchical punishment model (HPM) posits that TPP is an extension of SPP and both recruit common processes engaging large-scale domain-general brain networks. Here, we provided meta-analytic evidence to the HPM by combining the activation likelihood estimation approach with connectivity analyses and hierarchical clustering analyses. Although both forms of SOP engaged the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and bilateral anterior insula (AI), a functional differentiation also emerged with TPP preferentially engaging social cognitive regions (temporoparietal junction) and SPP affective regions (AI). Further, although both TPP and SPP recruit domain-general networks (salience, default-mode, and central-executive networks), some specificity in network organization was observed. By revealing differences and commonalities of the neural networks consistently activated by different types of SOP, our findings contribute to a better understanding of the neuropsychological mechanisms of social punishment behavior--one of the most peculiar human behaviors.

Distinct affective responses to second- and third-party norm violations

Social norm violations provoke strong emotional reactions that often culminate in punishment of the wrongdoer. This is true not only when we are the victims of the norm violation (second-party), but also when witnessing a complete stranger being victimized (third-party). What remains unclear, however, is whether second- and third-party punishments are associated with different emotions. To address this question, here we examine how subjects respond affectively to both second- and third-party norm violations in an economic game. Our results indicate that while second- and third-parties respond to norm violations by punishing wrongdoers similarly, they report experiencing distinct emotional states as a result of the violation. Specifically, we observed a cross-over interaction between anger and moral outrage depending on the party's context: while anger was more frequently reported for second- than for third-party violations, moral outrage was more evoked by third-party than second-party violations. Disgust and sadness were the most prevalently reported emotions, but their prevalence were unaffected by party contexts. These results indicate that while responses to second- and third-party violations result in similar punishment, they are associated with the expression of distinct affective palettes. Further, our results provide additional evidence that moral outrage is a critical experience in the evaluation of third-party wrongdoings.

Sentiment Analysis in Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders in an Ingroup/Outgroup Setting

People punish transgressors with different intensity depending if they are members of their group or not. We explore this in a cross-sectional analytical study with paired samples in children with developmental disorders who watched two videos and expressed their opinion. In Video-1, a football-player from the participant's country scores a goal with his hand. In Video-2, a player from another country does the same against the country of the participant. Each subject watched the two videos and their answers were compared. The autism spectrum disorder (ASD) group showed negative feelings in Video 1 (M = - .1; CI 95% - .51 to .31); and in Video 2 (M = - .43; CI 95% .77 to - .09; t(8) = 1.64, p = .13), but the attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, learning disabilities, intellectual disability groups showed positive opinion in Video-1 and negative in Video-2. This suggests that children with ASD respect rules regardless of whether those who break them belong or not to their own group, possibly due to lower degrees of empathy.

Cumulative Dopamine Genetic Score predicts behavioral and electrophysiological correlates of response inhibition via interactions with task demand

Functional genetic polymorphisms in the brain dopamine (DA) system have been suggested to underlie individual differences in response inhibition, namely the suppression of a prepotent or inappropriate action. However, findings on associations between single DA polymorphisms and inhibitory control often are mixed, partly due to their small effect sizes. In the present study, a cumulative genetic score (CGS) was used: alleles previously associated with both impulsive behavior and lower baseline DA level, precisely the DRD4 Exon III 7-repeat, DAT1 VNTR 10-repeat and the COMT 158val allele, each added a point to the DA-CGS. Participants (N = 128) completed a Go/No-Go task varying in difficulty and EEG recordings were made with focus on the NoGo-P3, an ERP that reflects inhibitory response processes. We found a higher DA-CGS (lower basal/tonic DA level) to be associated with better performance (lower %FA and more adaptive responding) in the very demanding/rapid than in the less demanding/rapid condition, whereas the reverse pattern was true for individuals with a lower DA-CGS. A similar interaction pattern of DA-CGS and task condition was found for NoGo-P3 amplitude. In line with assumptions of distinct optimum DA levels for different cognitive demands, a DA-CGS-dependent variation of tonic DA levels could have modulated the balance between cognitive stability and flexibility, thereby affecting the optimal DA level required for the specific task condition. Moreover, a task demand-dependent phasic DA release might have added to the DA-CGS-related basal/tonic DA levels, thereby additionally affecting the balance between flexibility and stability, in turn influencing performance and NoGo-P3.

How Cortisol Reactivity Influences Prosocial Decision-Making: The Moderating Role of Sex and Empathic Concern

The fight and flight theory and the tend-and-befriend theory suggest two opposite behavioral stress responses, and heterogeneous research results revealed the importance of taking sex into account. The experiment was designed to investigate the effect of stress-related cortisol reactivity on subsequent prosocial decision-making behaviors, and the moderating role of sex and empathic concern (EC) in the process. Sixty-one healthy students (34 women, 27 men) underwent the Trier Social Stress Test for Groups (TSST-G) or the control condition. Subsequently, participants completed three economic tasks-the dictator game, the ultimatum game, and the third-party compensation game. Statistical analyses revealed a significant main effect of cortisol reactivity on individuals' third-party compensation behaviorssex. A sex-specific effect of stress-related cortisol change on prosocial behaviors was found, with men behaving more generously in the dictator game as stress-related cortisol reactivity increased. Furthermore, the level of EC was found to moderate the association between stress-related cortisol change and prosocial behaviors, that individuals with a low level of EC reported more generosity and third-party compensation behaviors. Overall, the present study contributes to a better understanding of the behavioral stress responses, that individuals whose hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis are highly activated in response to stress would exhibit tend-and-befriend responses, but only among men and those with a low level of EC.

Disinhibited Revenge - An fNIRS Study on Forgiveness and Cognitive Control

The ability to reconcile is a key factor for a cooperative and successful life. Among the many factors that have an impact on how people negotiate social contracts, poor cognitive control (which is inversely linked to impulsivity) may exert negative effects on forgiveness. To investigate the neurobiological basis of this proposition, subjects with high vs. low impulsivity scores completed an ultimatum game (UG) and a dictator game (DG). First, the participants played an UG where they had to accept or reject offers from fair or unfair opponents. Afterward, the roles changed, and a DG was played. Here, subjects had the opportunity to forgive or take revenge on unfair opponents by the allocation of a fair/unfair amount of money. During this task, activity of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) was assessed via functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). Highly impulsive subjects were significantly more revenge-seeking than individuals with a low impulsivity. This behavioral difference was reflected in the activation pattern of the left DLPFC, where higher activation in trials with unfair opponents was found, but only in the highly impulsive group. This result is discussed as an indicator of more revenge-driven behavior in highly impulsive individuals, since activity in the left DLPFC is associated with retaliation.

Brain responses to social punishment: a meta-analysis

Many studies suggest that social punishment is beneficial for cooperation and consequently maintaining the social norms in society. Neuroimaging and brain stimulation studies show that the brain regions which respond to violations of social norms, the understanding of the mind of others and the executive functions, are involved during social punishment. Despite the rising number of studies on social punishment, the concordant map of activations - the set of key regions responsible for the general brain response to social punishment - is still unknown. By using coordinate-based fMRI meta-analysis, the present study examined the concordant map of neural activations associated with various social punishment tasks. A total of 17 articles with 18 contrasts including 383 participants, equalling 191 foci were included in activation likelihood estimation (ALE) analysis. The majority of the studies (61%) employed the widely used neuroeconomic paradigms, such as fairness-related norm tasks (Ultimatum Game, third-party punishment game), while the remaining tasks reported criminal scenarios evaluation and social rejection tasks. The analysis revealed concordant activation in the bilateral claustrum, right interior frontal and left superior frontal gyri. This study provides an integrative view on brain responses to social punishment.

Neurocognitive mechanisms of reactions to second- and third-party justice violations

The aim of the current study was threefold: (i) understand people's willingness to engage in either punishment of the perpetrator or compensation of the victim in order to counteract injustice; (ii) look into the differences between victims of and witnesses to injustice; (iii) investigate the different role played by social preference and affective experience in determining these choices. The sample tested here showed an equal preference for punishment and compensation; neuroimaging findings suggested that compensation, as opposed to punishment, was related to Theory of Mind. Partially supporting previous literature, choosing how to react to an injustice as victims, rather than witnesses, triggered a stronger affective response (striatal and prefrontal activation). Moreover, results supported the idea that deciding whether or not to react to an injustice and then how severely to react are two distinct decisional stages underpinned by different neurocognitive mechanisms, i.e., sensitivity to unfairness (anterior insula) and negative affectivity (amygdala). These findings provide a fine-grained description of the psychological mechanisms underlying important aspects of social norm compliance.

Social hierarchies in third-party punishment: A behavioral and ERP study

Third-party punishment refers to the punishment imposed by a party whose benefit is not directly affected by any norm violations. The present study using a modified Dictator Game explored how social statuses of the involved parties modulate punishment decisions of a third-party. Systematic manipulation of the dictators' and recipients' status revealed that: higher recipient status correlated with more severe punishment, but no effect of the dictator's. We further focused on the neural underlying of this effect using ERPs. An interaction of recipient's status × fairness was observed on MFN such that only for a high-status recipient, larger amplitude was triggered by unfair offers comparing to fair offers. On LPC, the largest amplitude was observed when the offer was fair and the recipient had medium-status. These findings suggested: participants consider unfair offers proposed to high-status recipients as more norm-violating and they may evaluate the offers from the perspective of the recipient.

Social isolation as a promising animal model of PTSD comorbid suicide: neurosteroids and cannabinoids as possible treatment options

Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a psychiatric condition characterized by drastic alterations in mood, emotions, social abilities and cognition. Notably, one aspect of PTSD, particularly in veterans, is its comorbidity with suicide. Elevated aggressiveness predicts high-risk to suicide in humans and despite the difficulty in reproducing a complex human suicidal behavior in rodents, aggressive behavior is a well reproducible behavioral trait of suicide. PTSD animal models are based on a peculiar phenotype, including exaggerated fear memory and impaired fear extinction associated with neurochemical dysregulations in the brain circuitry regulating emotion. The endocannabinoid and the neurosteroid systems regulate emotions and stress responses, and recent evidence shows these two systems are interrelated and critically compromised in neuropsychiatric disorders. For instance, levels of the neurosteroid, allopregnanolone, as well as those of the endocannabinoids, anandamide and its congener, palmitoylethanolamide are decreased in PTSD. Similarly, the endocannabinoid system and neurosteroid biosynthesis are altered in suicidal individuals. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), the only FDA-approved treatments for PTSD, fail to help half of the treatment-seeking patients. This highlights the need for developing biomarker-based efficient therapies. One promising alternative to SSRIs points to stimulation of allopregnanolone biosynthesis as a treatment and a valid end-point to predict treatment response in PTSD patients. This review highlights running findings on the role of the endocannabinoid and neurosteroid systems in PTSD and suicidal behavior both in a preclinical and clinical perspective. A specific focus is given to predictive PTSD/suicide animal models. Ultimately, we discuss the idea that disruption of neurosteroid and endocannabinoid biosynthesis may offer a novel promising biomarker axis to develop new treatments for PTSD and, perhaps, suicidal behavior.

Altruistic punishment is connected to trait anger, not trait altruism, if compensation is available

Altruistic punishment and altruistic compensation are important concepts that are used to investigate altruism. However, altruistic punishment has been found to be correlated with anger. We were interested whether altruistic punishment and altruistic compensation are both driven by trait altruism and trait anger or whether the influence of those two traits is more specific to one of the behavioral options. We found that if the participants were able to apply altruistic compensation and altruistic punishment together in one paradigm, trait anger only predicts altruistic punishment and trait altruism only predicts altruistic compensation. Interestingly, these relations are disguised in classical altruistic punishment and altruistic compensation paradigms where participants can either only punish or compensate. Hence altruistic punishment and altruistic compensation paradigms should be merged together if one is interested in trait altruism without the confounding influence of trait anger.