Social Support Modulates Neural Responses to Unfairness in the Ultimatum Game

Reconfiguration of the costly punishment network architecture in punishment decision-making

Human costly punishment is rooted in multiple regions across large-scale functional systems, a collection of which constitutes the costly punishment network (CPN). Our previous study found that the CPN is intrinsically organized in an optimized and reliable manner to support individual costly punishment propensity. However, it remains unknown how the CPN is reconfigured in response to external cognitive demands in punishment decision-making. Here, we combined resting-state and task-functional magnetic resonance imaging to examine the task-related reconfigurations of intrinsic organizations of the CPN when participants made decisions of costly punishment in the Ultimatum Game. Although a strong consistency was observed in the overall pattern and each nodal profile between the intrinsic (task-free) and extrinsic (task-evoked) functional connectivity of the CPN, condition-general and condition-specific reconfigurations were also evident. Specifically, both unfair and fair conditions induced increases in functional connectivity between a few specific pairs of regions, and the unfair condition additionally induced increases in network efficiency of the CPN. Intriguingly, the specific changes in global efficiency of the CPN in the unfair condition were associated with individual differences in costly punishment after adjusting for the corresponding results in the fair condition, which were further identified for females but not for males. These findings were largely reproducible on independent samples. Collectively, our findings provide novel insights into how the CPN adaptively reconfigures its network architecture to support costly punishment.

Cognitive process underlying ultimatum game: An eye-tracking study from a dual-system perspective

According to the dual-system theories, the decisions in an ultimatum game (UG) are governed by the automatic System 1 and the controlled System 2. The former drives the preference for fairness, whereas the latter drives the self-interest motive. However, the association between the contributions of the two systems in UG and the cognitive process needs more direct evidence. In the present study, we used the process dissociation procedure to estimate the contributions of the two systems and recorded participants eye movements to examine the cognitive processes underlying UG decisions. Results showed that the estimated contributions of the two systems are uncorrelated and that they demonstrate a dissociated pattern of associations with third variables, such as reaction time (RT) and mean fixation duration (MFD). Furthermore, the relative time advantage (RTA) and the transitions between the two payoffs can predict the final UG decisions. Our findings provide evidence for the independent contributions of preference for fairness (System 1) and self-interest maximizing (System 2) inclinations to UG and shed light on the underlying processes.

A meta-analysis on shared and distinct neural correlates of the decision-making underlying altruistic and retaliatory punishment

Individuals who violate social norms will most likely face social punishment sanctions. Those sanctions are based on different motivation aspects, depending on the context. Altruistic punishment occurs if punishment aims to re‐establish the social norms even at cost for the punisher. Retaliatory punishment is driven by anger or spite and aims to harm the other. While neuroimaging research highlighted the neural networks supporting decision‐making in both types of punishment in isolation, it remains unclear whether they rely on the same or distinct neural systems. We ran an activation likelihood estimation meta‐analysis on functional magnetic resonance imaging data on 24 altruistic and 19 retaliatory punishment studies to investigate the neural correlates of decision‐making underlying social punishment and whether altruistic and retaliatory punishments share similar brain networks. Social punishment reliably activated the bilateral insula, inferior frontal gyrus, midcingulate cortex (MCC), and superior and medial frontal gyri. This network largely overlapped with activation clusters found for altruistic punishment. However, retaliatory punishment revealed only one cluster in a posterior part of the MCC, which was not recruited in altruistic punishment. Our results support previous models on social punishment and highlight differential involvement of the MCC in altruistic and retaliatory punishments, reflecting the underlying different motivations.

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.