Abstract:Promises are crucial for maintaining trust in social hierarchies. It is well known that not all promises are kept; yet the effect of social status on responses to promises being kept or broken is far from understood, as are the neural processes underlying this effect. Here we manipulated participants' social status before measuring their investment behavior as Investor in iterated Trust Game (TG). Participants decided how much to invest in their partners, who acted as Trustees in TG, after being informed that their partners of higher or lower social status either promised to return half of the multiplied sum (4 × invested amount), did not promise, or had no opportunity to promise. Event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded when the participants saw the Trustees' decisions in which the partners always returned half of the time, regardless of the experimental conditions. Trustee decisions to return or not after promising to do so were defined as honesty and dishonesty, respectively. Behaviorally, participants invested more when Trustees promised than when Trustees had no opportunity to promise, and this effect was greater for higher status than lower status Trustees. Neurally, when viewing Trustees' return decisions, participants' medial frontal negativity (MFN) responses (250-310 ms post onset) were more negative when Trustees did not return than when they did return, suggesting that not returning was an expectancy violation. P300 responses were only sensitive to higher status return feedback, and were more positive-going for higher status partner returns than for lower status partner returns, suggesting that higher status returns may have been more rewarding/motivationally significant. Importantly, only participants in low subjective socioeconomic status (SES) evidenced an increased P300 effect for higher status than lower status honesty (honesty - dishonesty), suggesting that higher status honesty was especially rewarding/motivationally significant for participants with low SES. Taken together, our results suggest that in an earlier time window, MFN encodes return valence, regardless of honesty or social status, which are addressed in a later cognitive appraisal process (P300). Our findings suggest that social status influences honesty perception at both a behavioral and neural level, and that subjective SES may modulate this effect.

The impact of social hierarchies on neural response to feedback evaluations after advice giving

Evaluations from Superiors Matter More: Evidence from Behavior and Event-related Potentials

Social relationship modulates advisor's brain response to advice-giving outcome evaluation: Evidence from an event-related potential study

Interpersonal distance affects advisors' responses to feedback on their advice: Evidence from event-related potentials

The influence of self-esteem on interpersonal and competence evaluations: electrophysiological evidence from an ERP study

To Run with the Herd or Not: Electrophysiological Dynamics Are Associated with Preference Change in Crowdfunding

Attention modulations on the perception of social hierarchy at distinct temporal stages: An electrophysiological investigation

An fMRI study on how decisions are influenced by affective evaluations from different social hierarchical positions

Know Your Place: Neural Processing of Social Hierarchy in Humans

Cardiac deceleration following positive and negative feedback is influenced by competence-based social status

Low social status decreases the neural salience of unfairness

Effect of social distance on outcome evaluation in self–other decision-making: evidence from event-related potentials

Social hierarchies and emotions: Cortical prefrontal activity, facial feedback (EMG), and cognitive performance in a dynamic interaction

Higher Status Honesty Is Worth More: The Effect of Social Status on Honesty Evaluation

How do decision makers evaluate advice from advisors with happy and angry expressions? A behavioural and ERP study

Hierarchical status is rapidly assessed from behaviourally dominant faces

Social status determines how we monitor and evaluate our performance.

Modulation of the brain activity in outcome evaluation by the presence of an audience: An electrophysiological investigation.

P2 Manifests Subjective Evaluation of Reward Processing Under Social Comparison

Increased sensitivity to social hierarchy during social competition versus cooperation

Brain potentials in outcome evaluation: when social comparison takes effect.