The neural computation of human prosocial choices in complex motivational states

Empathy incites a stable prosocial decision bias

Empathy toward suffering individuals serves as potent driver for prosocial behavior. However, it remains unclear whether prosociality induced by empathy for another person's pain persists once that person's suffering diminishes. To test this, participants underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging while performing a binary social decision task that involved allocation of points to themselves and another person. In block one, participants completed the task after witnessing frequent painful stimulation of the other person, and in block two, after observing low frequency of painful stimulation. Drift-diffusion modeling revealed an increased initial bias toward making prosocial decisions in the first block compared with baseline that persisted in the second block. These results were replicated in an independent behavioral study. An additional control study showed that this effect may be specific to empathy as stability was not evident when prosocial decisions were driven by a social norm such as reciprocity. Increased neural activation in dorsomedial prefrontal cortex was linked to empathic concern after witnessing frequent pain and to a general prosocial decision bias after witnessing rare pain. Altogether, our findings show that empathy for pain elicits a stable inclination toward making prosocial decisions even as their suffering diminishes.

A neurocomputational account of the link between social perception and social action

People selectively help others based on perceptions of their merit or need. Here, we develop a neurocomputational account of how these social perceptions translate into social choice. Using a novel fMRI social perception task, we show that both merit and need perceptions recruited the brain's social inference network. A behavioral computational model identified two non-exclusive mechanisms underlying variance in social perceptions: a consistent tendency to perceive others as meritorious/needy (bias) and a propensity to sample and integrate normative evidence distinguishing high from low merit/need in other people (sensitivity). Variance in people's merit (but not need) bias and sensitivity independently predicted distinct aspects of altruism in a social choice task completed months later. An individual's merit bias predicted context-independent variance in people's overall other-regard during altruistic choice, biasing people towards prosocial actions. An individual's merit sensitivity predicted context-sensitive discrimination in generosity towards high and low merit recipients by influencing other-regard and self-regard during altruistic decision-making. This context-sensitive perception-action link was associated with activation in the right temporoparietal junction. Together, these findings point towards stable, biologically based individual differences in perceptual processes related to abstract social concepts like merit, and suggest that these differences may have important behavioral implications for an individual's tendency toward favoritism or discrimination in social settings.

Higher subjective socioeconomic status is linked to increased charitable giving and mentalizing-related neural value coding

Socioeconomic status (SES), a concept related to an individual's economic and social position relative to others, can shape social interactions like altruistic behaviors. However, little is known about the exact neurocognitive mechanisms that link SES with altruism. Our study aimed to provide a comprehensive account of the sociocognitive and neural mechanisms through which SES affects charitable giving - an important variant of human altruism. To this end, participants completed a charitable donation task while their brain activity was measured using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). We also assessed participants' socio-cognitive ability to infer other people's mental states (i.e., mentalizing) - a driver of prosocial behavior - in an independent social task. Behaviorally, we found that both charitable giving and social cognition were status-dependent, as subjective SES positively predicted donations and mentalizing capacity. Moreover, the link between SES and charitable giving was mediated by individuals' mentalizing capacity. At the neural level, a multivariate pattern analysis of fMRI data revealed that higher subjective SES was associated with stronger value coding in the right temporoparietal junction (rTPJ). The strength of this value representation predicted charitable giving and was linked to mentalizing. Furthermore, we observed an increased negative functional coupling between rTPJ and left putamen with higher SES. Together, increased charitable giving in higher-status individuals could be explained by status-dependent recruitment of mentalizing-related value coding and altered functional connectivity in the brain. Our findings provide insights into the socio- and neurocognitive mechanisms explaining why and when higher SES leads to prosociality, which might ultimately inform targeted interventions to promote prosocial behavior in human societies.

Can monetary incentives overturn fairness-based decisions?

Fairness norms and resulting behaviours are an important prerequisite for cooperation in human societies. At the same time, financial incentives are commonly used to motivate social behaviours, yet it remains unclear how financial incentives affect fairness-based behaviours. Combining a decision paradigm from behavioural economics with hierarchical drift-diffusion modelling, we investigated the effect of different financial incentives on two types of fairness-based decisions in four experimental groups. In two groups, participants divided points between themselves and a disadvantaged person, inciting fairness-based compensation behaviour, in two other groups they divided points between themselves and a fairness violator, inciting fairness-based punishment behaviour. In addition, each group received financial incentives that were either aligned or in conflict with the respective fairness-based behaviour. This design allowed us to directly investigate how different incentives shape the cognitive mechanism of fairness-based decisions and whether these effects are comparable across different fairness domains (fairness-based punishment versus fairness-based compensation). Results showed that offering conflicting incentives diminished fairness-congruent decision behaviour and rendered the fairness-congruent decision process less efficient. These findings demonstrate that financial incentives can undermine fairness-based behaviour, and thus are relevant for the development of incentive schemes aimed at fostering cooperative behaviour.

Valence framing induces cognitive bias

Valence framing effects refer to inconsistent choice preferences in response to positive versus negative formulation of mathematically equivalent outcomes. Here, we manipulate valence framing in a two-alternative forced choice dictator game using gains and losses as frames to investigate the cognitive mechanisms underlying valence framing. We applied a Drift-Diffusion Model (DDM) to examine whether gain (i.e., “take” money) and loss (i.e., “give” money) frames evoke a cognitive bias as previous research did not consistently reveal framing effects using reaction times and response frequency as dependent variables. DDMs allow decomposing the decision process into separate cognitive mechanisms, whereby a cognitive bias was repeatedly associated with a shift in the starting point of the model. Conducting both a laboratory (N = 62) and an online study (N = 109), female participants allocated money between themselves and another person in a prosocial or selfish way. In each study, one group was instructed to give money (give frame), the other to take money (take frame). Consistent with previous studies, no differences were found in response times and response frequencies. However, in both studies, substantial bias towards the selfish option was found in the take frame groups, captured by the starting point of the DDM. Thus, our results suggest that valence framing induces a cognitive bias in decision processing in women, even when no behavioral differences are present.

The bright and dark sides of egoism

Despite its negative reputation, egoism - the excessive concern for one's own welfare - can incite prosocial behavior. So far, however, egoism-based prosociality has received little attention. Here, we first provide an overview of the conditions under which egoism turns into a prosocial motive, review the benefits and limitations of egoism-based prosociality, and compare them with empathy-driven prosocial behavior. Second, we summarize studies investigating the neural processing of egoism-based prosocial decisions, studies investigating the neural processing of empathy-based prosocial decisions, and the small number of studies that compared the neural processing of prosocial decisions elicited by the different motives. We conclude that there is evidence for differential neural networks involved in egoism and empathy-based prosocial decisions. However, this evidence is not yet conclusive, because it is mainly based on the comparison of different experimental paradigms which may exaggerate or overshadow the effect of the different motivational states. Finally, we propose paradigms and research questions that should be tackled in future research that could help to specify how egoism can be used to enhance other prosocial behavior and motivation, and the how it could be tamed.

Financial incentives facilitate stronger neural computation of prosocial decisions in lower empathic adult females

Financial incentives are commonly used to motivate behaviors. However, there is also evidence that incentives can impede the behavior they are supposed to foster, for example, documented by a decrease in blood donations if a financial incentive is offered. Based on these findings, previous studies assumed that prosocial motivation is shaped by incentives. However, so far, there is no direct evidence showing an interaction between financial incentives and a specific prosocial motive. Combining drift-diffusion modeling and fMRI, we investigated the effect of financial incentives on empathy, i.e., one of the key motives driving prosocial decisions. In the empathy-alone condition, participants made prosocial decisions based on empathy. In the empathy-bonus condition, they were offered a financial bonus for prosocial decisions, in addition to empathy induction. On average, the bonus enhanced the information accumulation in empathy-based decisions. On the neural level, this enhancement was related to the anterior insula, the same region that also correlated with empathy ratings. Moreover, the effect of the financial incentive on anterior insula activation was stronger the lower a person scored on empathy. These findings show that financial incentives enhance prosocial motivation in the absence of empathy.

Functional MRI in Radiology—A Personal Review

We, here, provide a personal review article on the development of a functional MRI in the radiology departments of two German university medicine units. Although the international community for human brain mapping has met since 1995, the researchers fascinated by human brain function are still young and innovative. However, the impact of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) on prognosis and treatment decisions is restricted, even though standardized methods have been developed. The tradeoff between the groundbreaking studies on brain function and the attempt to provide reliable biomarkers for clinical decisions is large. By describing some historical developments in the field of fMRI, from a personal view, the rise of this method in clinical neuroscience during the last 25 years might be understandable. We aim to provide some background for (a) the historical developments of fMRI, (b) the establishment of two research units for fMRI in the departments of radiology in Germany, and (c) a description of some contributions within the selected fields of systems neuroscience, clinical neurology, and behavioral psychology.