The low-flow or high-flow oxygen delivery system and a low-flow or high-flow nonrebreather mask.

R. Agarwal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1164/AJRCCM.174.9.1055A

IF: 24.7

2006-11-01

American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Neural evidence for inequality-averse social preferences

Elizabeth Tricomi,Antonio Rangel,Colin F. Camerer,John P. O’Doherty

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08785

IF: 64.8

2010-02-01

Nature

Abstract:For richer, for poorerBased on experimental and field evidence, social scientists commonly assume that human behaviour favours outcomes that are 'fair', keeping inequality to a minimum since experience suggests that in the long run all will benefit. Now a novel role-play experiment in human male volunteers whose brain activity was being tracked by functional magnetic resonance imaging provides evidence for a neural basis for such 'inequality-averse' social preferences. The experiment starts with one of a pair of participants being made 'rich', receiving a large monetary payout; the other receives nothing and stays 'poor'. Neural responses in the striatum and prefrontal cortex of the 'rich' subjects were stronger when the other individual received further payments. In the 'poor' subjects, neural responses in the same areas were stronger when they themselves received the money. This suggests that the brain's reward circuitry is sensitive to distribution inequality and is actively modulated relative to context.

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

Qi Li,Xinyu Lai,Ting Li,Kristoffer Hougaard Madsen,Jing Xiao,Kesong Hu,Chunliang Feng,Di Fu,Xun Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2024.120707

IF: 5.7

2024-08-15

NeuroImage

Abstract: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.
Self-interest overrides rank-reversal aversion in resource distribution

Minyoung Kim,Kun Il Kim,Hackjin Kim

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-70225-9

IF: 4.6

2024-08-27

Scientific Reports

Abstract:The equitable allocation of resources has long been a central concern for humanity, prompting extensive research into various motivations that drive the pursuit of distributive justice. In contrast to one of the most fundamental motives, inequality aversion, a conflicting motive has been proposed: rank-reversal aversion. However, it remains unclear whether this rank-reversal aversion persists in the presence of self-rank. Here we provide evidence of rank-reversal aversion in the first-party context and explore diverse moral strategies for distribution. In a modified version of the redistribution game involving 55 online-recruited participants, we observed rank-reversal aversion only when one's rank was maintained. When participants' self-rank was altered, they tended to base their behavior on their new ranks. This behavioral tendency varied among individuals, revealing three distinct moral strategies, all incorporating considerations of rank-reversal. Our findings suggest that rank-reversal aversion can indeed influence one's distribution behavior, although the extent of its impact may vary among individuals, especially when self-rank is a factor. These insights can be extended to political and economic domains, contributing to a deeper understanding of the underlying mechanisms of distributive justice.

multidisciplinary sciences
The Neurocomputational Mechanism Underlying Decision-Making on Unfairness to Self and Others

Lanxin Luo,Han Xu,Xia Tian,Yue Zhao,Ruoling Xiong,Huafeng Dong,Xiaoqing Li,Yuhe Wang,Yue‑Jia Luo,Chunliang Feng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12264-024-01245-8

IF: 5.271

2024-06-21

Neuroscience Bulletin

Abstract: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.

neurosciences
Selfish behavior requires top-down control of prosocial motivation

Shotaro Numano,Chris Frith,Masahiko Haruno

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.04.574159

2024-01-04

Abstract:Individuals must regularly choose between prosocial and proself behaviors. While past neuroscience research has revealed the neural foundations for prosocial behaviors, many studies have oversimplified proself behaviors, viewing them merely as a reward-maximization process. However, recent behavioral evidence suggests that response times for proself behaviors are often slower than those for prosocial behaviors, suggesting a more complex interdependence between prosocial and proself neural computations. To address this issue, we conducted an fMRI experiment with the ultimatum game, where participants were requested to accept (money distributed as proposed) or reject (both sides receive none) offers of money distribution. In the decisions, the participants could maximize self-interest by accepting the offer (i.e., proself), while by rejecting it, they could punish unfair proposers and promote the “equity” social norm (i.e., prosocial). We constructed a drift diffusion model (DDM) that considers both behavioral choices and response times and used the DDM parameters in our fMRI analysis. We observed that participants who suppressed inequity-driven rejection behaviors displayed heightened dACC activity in response to disadvantageous inequity. Importantly, our functional connectivity analysis demonstrated that the dACC exhibited negative functional connectivity with the amygdala when unfair offers were presented. Furthermore, the PPI connectivity encoded the average reaction time for accepting unfair offers (i.e., proself behaviors). Considering that the amygdala also responded to disadvantageous inequity in these experiments and previous studies, these results show that the top-down control of prosocial motives (i.e., aversion to disadvantageous inequity) plays a key role in implementing proself behaviors.

Neuroscience
Inequality signals in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex inform social preference models

Lisa Holper,Christopher J Burke,Christoph Fausch,Erich Seifritz,Philippe N Tobler

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsy020

2018-05-01

Abstract:Humans typically display inequality aversion in social situations, which manifests itself as a preference for fairer distributions of resources. However, people differ in the degree to which they dislike being worse off [disadvantageous inequality (DI) aversion] or better off [advantageous inequality (AI) aversion] than others. Competing models explain such behavior by focusing on aversion to payoff differences, maximization of total payoff or reciprocity. Using functional near-infrared spectroscopy, we asked which of these theories could better explain dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) activity while participants accepted or punished fair vs unfair monetary transfers in an anonymous norm compliance task. We found that while all participants exhibited DI aversion, there were substantial differences in preferences for AI, which were strongly predicted by dlPFC activation. Model comparisons revealed that both punishment behavior and prefrontal activity were best explained by a model that allowed for AI seeking rather than imposing aversion. Moreover, enhancing this model by taking into account behavioral response times, as a proxy for choice difficulty, further improved model fits. Our data provide evidence that the dlPFC encodes subjective values of payoff inequality and that this representation is richer than envisaged by standard models of social preferences.
Neural mechanisms of cooperation and fairness in iterative prisoner's dilemma

Xizhuo Zou,Dandan Li,Ofir Turel,Qinghua He

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2024.115272

2025-01-05

Abstract:Cooperation is a universal human principle reflecting working with others to achieve common goals. The rational decision-making model contends that cooperation is the best strategy for maximizing benefits in an iterative prisoner's dilemma. However, the motivations for cooperation (or betrayal) are complex and diverse, and often include fairness reflections. In this study, we used functional magnetic resonance imaging to study underlying neural differences in brain regions related to fairness when people interact with an opponent who tend to cooperate or betray, at different decision-making stages. Results based on 40 university students (25 women) indicate that experiences of cooperation or betrayal affect people's fairness perception. Distinct neural activities occur in expectation, decision, and outcome phases of decisions. In the expectation phase, those in the cooperative condition exhibited increased activation in the anterior cingulate gyrus, medial superior frontal gyrus, and caudate nucleus compared to those in the uncooperative condition. During the decision phase, those in the cooperative condition showed greater activation in the middle frontal gyrus, caudate nucleus/frontal insula, inferior frontal gyrus, and cingulate gyrus compared to those in the uncooperative condition. In the outcome feedback phase, the caudate nucleus, insula, cingulate gyrus, and inferior frontal gyrus of the orbit were more active in the uncooperative condition than in the cooperative condition. Results also showed a significant correlation between caudate activity and the perception of fairness when expecting uncooperative conditions.
Distinguishing neural correlates of context-dependent advantageous- and disadvantageous-inequity aversion

Xiaoxue Gao,Hongbo Yu,Ignacio Sáez,Philip R. Blue,Lusha Zhu,Ming Hsu,Xiaolin Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1802523115

IF: 11.1

2018-07-30

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract:Significance Despite extensive research on disadvantageous inequity, little is known about advantageous inequity and whether these two types of inequity involve differential neurocognitive mechanisms. We address these questions from the perspective of context dependency and suggest that these two types of inequity are associated with differential neurocognitive substrates, subserved by different brain regions and in particular by the spatial gradient in insular activity. Our findings shed light on how social contexts (i.e., interpersonal guilt) are integrated into social decision making and suggest that the resistance to unequal situations when individuals are in disadvantageous status may primarily stem from their emotional responses, whereas the resistance to unequal situations when individuals are in advantageous status may involve advanced cognitive functions such as mentalizing.
Social status modulates the neural response to unfairness

Jie Hu,Philip R Blue,Hongbo Yu,Xiaoliang Gong,Yang Xiang,Changjun Jiang,Xiaolin Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsv086

Abstract:In human society, which is organized by social hierarchies, resources are usually allocated unequally and based on social status. In this study, we analyze how being endowed with different social statuses in a math competition affects the perception of fairness during asset allocation in a subsequent Ultimatum Game (UG). Behavioral data showed that when participants were in high status, they were more likely to reject unfair UG offers than in low status. This effect of social status correlated with activity in the right anterior insula (rAI) and with the functional connectivity between the rAI and a region in the anterior middle cingulate cortex, indicating that these two brain regions are crucial for integrating contextual factors and social norms during fairness perception. Additionally, there was an interaction between social status and UG offer fairness in the amygdala and thalamus, implicating the role of these regions in the modulation of social status on fairness perception. These results demonstrate the effect of social status on fairness perception and the potential neural underpinnings for this effect.
The "motive cocktail" in altruistic behaviors

Xiaoyan Wu,Xiangjuan Ren,Chao Liu,Hang Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.08.20.554026

2024-07-04

Abstract:Prosocial motives such as social equality and efficiency are key to altruistic behaviors. However, predicting the range of altruistic behaviors in varying contexts and among different individuals proves challenging if we limit ourselves to one or two motives, as most previous studies have done. Here we demonstrate the numerous, interdependent motives in altruistic behaviors and the possibility to disentangle them through behavioral experimental data and computational modeling. In one laboratory experiment (N=157) and one pre-registered online replication (N=1258) across 100 different situations, we found that both third-party punishment and helping behaviors aligned best with a model of seven socioeconomic motives, referred to as a motive cocktail, including two compound motives. For instance, the inequality discounting motives imply that individuals, when confronted with costly interventions, behave as if the inequality between others barely exists. The motive cocktail model also provides a unified explanation for a range of phenomena in the literature.

Neuroscience
Predicting Human Behavior Toward Members of Different Social Groups.

Adrianna C Jenkins,Pierre Karashchuk,Lusha Zhu,Ming Hsu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1719452115

2018-01-01

Abstract:Disparities in outcomes across social groups pervade human societies and are of central interest to the social sciences. How people treat others is known to depend on a multitude of factors (e.g., others' gender, ethnicity, appearance) even when these should be irrelevant. However, despite substantial progress, much remains unknown regarding (i) the set of mechanisms shaping people's behavior toward members of different social groups and (ii) the extent to which these mechanisms can explain the structure of existing societal disparities. Here, we show in a set of experiments the important interplay between social perception and social valuation processes in explaining how people treat members of different social groups. Building on the idea that stereotypes can be organized onto basic, underlying dimensions, we first found using laboratory economic games that quantitative variation in stereotypes about different groups' warmth and competence translated meaningfully into resource allocation behavior toward those groups. Computational modeling further revealed that these effects operated via the interaction of social perception and social valuation processes, with warmth and competence exerting diverging effects on participants' preferences for equitable distributions of resources. This framework successfully predicted behavior toward members of a diverse set of social groups across samples and successfully generalized to predict societal disparities documented in labor and education settings with substantial precision and accuracy. Together, these results highlight a common set of mechanisms linking social group information to social treatment and show how preexisting, societally shared assumptions about different social groups can produce and reinforce societal disparities.
Is Distributional Justice Equivalent to Prosocial Sharing in Children's Cognition?

Yuning Zhu,Jingmiao Zhang,Xiuli Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.888028

IF: 3.8

2022-07-12

Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract:Distribution and sharing are social preference behaviors supported and shaped by selection pressures, which express individuals' concern for the welfare of others. Distributive behavior results in distributive justice, which is at the core of moral justice. Sharing is a feature of the prosocial realm. The connotations of distribution and sharing are different, so the principles, research paradigms, and social functions of the two are also different. Three potential causes of confusion between the two in the current research on distribution and sharing are discussed. First, they share common factors in terms of individual cognition, situation, and social factors. Second, although they are conceptually different, prosocial sharing and distribution fairness sensitivity are mutually predictive in individual infants. Similarly, neural differences in preschoolers' perception of distribution fairness predict their subsequent sharing generosity. Finally, similar activation regions are relevant to distribution and sharing situations that need behavioral control on a neural basis.

psychology, multidisciplinary
Dopamine Modulates Egalitarian Behavior in Humans

Ignacio Sáez,Lusha Zhu,Eric Set,Andrew Kayser,Ming Hsu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2015.01.071

IF: 9.2

2015-03-01

Current Biology

Abstract:Egalitarian motives form a powerful force in promoting prosocial behavior and enabling large-scale cooperation in the human species [1]. At the neural level, there is substantial, albeit correlational, evidence suggesting a link between dopamine and such behavior [2, 3]. However, important questions remain about the specific role of dopamine in setting or modulating behavioral sensitivity to prosocial concerns. Here, using a combination of pharmacological tools and economic games, we provide critical evidence for a causal involvement of dopamine in human egalitarian tendencies. Specifically, using the brain penetrant catechol-O-methyl transferase (COMT) inhibitor tolcapone [4, 5], we investigated the causal relationship between dopaminergic mechanisms and two prosocial concerns at the core of a number of widely used economic games: (1) the extent to which individuals directly value the material payoffs of others, i.e., generosity, and (2) the extent to which they are averse to differences between their own payoffs and those of others, i.e., inequity. We found that dopaminergic augmentation via COMT inhibition increased egalitarian tendencies in participants who played an extended version of the dictator game [6]. Strikingly, computational modeling of choice behavior [7] revealed that tolcapone exerted selective effects on inequity aversion, and not on other computational components such as the extent to which individuals directly value the material payoffs of others. Together, these data shed light on the causal relationship between neurochemical systems and human prosocial behavior and have potential implications for our understanding of the complex array of social impairments accompanying neuropsychiatric disorders involving dopaminergic dysregulation.

cell biology,biochemistry & molecular biology,biology
Sex-based differences in fairness norm compliance and neural circuitry

Wanting Chen,Zhibing Xiao,Ofir Turel,Shuyue Zhang,Qinghua He

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhae052

IF: 4.861

2024-01-31

Cerebral Cortex

Abstract:Abstract Human behavior often aligns with fairness norms, either voluntarily or under external pressure, like sanctions. Prior research has identified distinct neural activation patterns associated with voluntary and sanction-based compliance or non-compliance with fairness norms. However, an investigation gap exists into potential neural connectivity patterns and sex-based differences. To address this, we conducted a study using a monetary allocation game and functional magnetic resonance imaging to examine how neural activity and connectivity differ between sexes across three norm compliance conditions: voluntary, sanction-based, and voluntary post-sanctions. Fifty-five adults (27 females) participated, revealing that punishment influenced decisions, leading to strategic calculations and reduced generosity in voluntary compliance post-sanctions. Moreover, there were sex-based differences in neural activation and connectivity across the different compliance conditions. Specifically, the connectivity between the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and right dorsal anterior insular appeared to mediate intuitive preferences, with variations across norm compliance conditions and sexes. These findings imply potential sex-based differences in intuitive motivation for diverse norm compliance conditions. Our insights contribute to a better understanding of the neural pathways involved in fairness norm compliance and clarify sex-based differences, offering implications for future investigations into psychiatric and neurological disorders characterized by atypical socialization and mentalizing.

neurosciences
Spatial gradient in activity within the insula reflects dissociable neural mechanisms underlying context-dependent advantageous and disadvantageous inequity aversion

Xiaoxue Gao,Hongbo Yu,Ignacio Saez,Philip R. Blue,Lusha Zhu,Ming Hsu,Xiaolin Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/243428

2018-01-05

Abstract:Abstract Humans are capable of integrating social contextual information into decision-making processes to adjust their attitudes towards inequity. This context-dependency emerges both when individual is better off (i.e. advantageous inequity) and worse off (i.e. disadvantageous inequity) than others. It is not clear however, whether the context-dependent processing of advantageous and disadvantageous inequity rely on dissociable or shared neural mechanisms. Here, by combining an interpersonal interactive game that gave rise to interpersonal guilt and different versions of the dictator games that enabled us to characterize individual weights on aversion to advantageous and disadvantageous inequity, we investigated the neural mechanisms underlying the two forms of inequity aversion in the interpersonal guilt context. In each round, participants played a dot-estimation task with an anonymous co-player. The co-players received pain stimulation with 50% probability when anyone responded incorrectly. At the end of each round, participants completed a dictator game, which determined payoffs of him/herself and the co-player. Both computational model-based and model-free analyses demonstrated that when inflicting pain upon co-players (i.e., the guilt context), participants cared more about advantageous inequity and became less sensitive to disadvantageous inequity, compared with other social contexts. The contextual effects on two forms of inequity aversion are uncorrelated with each other at the behavioral level. Neuroimaging results revealed that the context-dependent representation of inequity aversion exhibited a spatial gradient in activity within the insula, with anterior parts predominantly involved in the aversion to advantageous inequity and posterior parts predominantly involved in the aversion to disadvantageous inequity. The dissociable mechanisms underlying the two forms of inequity aversion are further supported by the involvement of right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and dorsomedial prefrontal cortex in advantageous inequity processing, and the involvement of right amygdala and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex in disadvantageous inequity processing. These results extended our understanding of decision-making processes involving inequity and the social functions of inequity aversion.
Does Unfairness Evoke Anger or Disgust? A Quantitative Neurofunctional Dissection Based on 25 Years of Neuroimaging

Xianyang Gan,Ran Zhang,Zihao Zheng,Lan Wang,Xi Yang,Benjamin Klugah-Brown,Ting Xu,Nan Qiu,Keith M Kendrick,Klaus Mathiak,Justin Tiwald,Dezhong Yao,Benjamin Becker

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.10.17.618853

2024-10-21

Abstract:Over the last decades, the traditional 'Homo economicus' model has been increasingly challenged by convergent evidence underscoring the impact of emotions on decision-making. A classic example is the perception of unfairness operationalized in the Ultimatum Game where humans readily sacrifice personal gains to punish those who violate fairness norms. While the emotional mechanism underlying costly punishments has been widely acknowledged, the distinct contributions of moral emotions (anger or disgust) remain debated, partly due to methodological limitations of the conventional experiments. Here, we capitalize on a quantitative neurofunctional dissection approach by combining recent developments in neuroimaging meta-analyses, behavioral-level, network-level, and neurochemical-level decoding and data from 3,266 participants from functional neuroimaging studies to determine the common and distinct neural representations between unfairness and the two moral emotions. Experience of unfairness engaged a widespread bilateral network encompassing insular, cingulate, and frontal regions, with dorsal striatal regions mediating the decision to reject unfair offers. Disgust engaged a defensive-avoidance circuit encompassing amygdalar, occipital, and frontal regions, while anger engaged non-overlapping systems including mid-cingulate, thalamic, and frontal regions. Unfairness and anger or disgust respectively commonly engaged the anterior and mid-insula, while the latter additionally showed common recruitment of ventrolateral prefrontal and orbitofrontal cortices. Multimodal network, behavioral, and serotonergic decoding provided a more granular and convincing dissection of these results. Findings indicate a shared neuroaffective basis underlying the impact of emotions on unfairness-induced punishment behavior and suggest a common brain circuit has been evolutionarily shaped to protect individuals from personal harm and enforce societal norms.

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

Lisa M. Bas,Ian D. Roberts,Cendri A. Hutcherson,Anita Tusche

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.10.02.560256

2024-01-18

Abstract: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 predicted variance in people’s overall other-regard during altruistic choice, biasing people towards prosocial actions. An individual’s merit predicted 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.

Neuroscience
Social value orientation modulates fairness processing during social decision-making: evidence from behavior and brain potentials

Xinmu Hu,Xiaoqin Mai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsab032

IF: 4.235

2021-03-26

Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience

Abstract:Abstract Social value orientation (SVO) characterizes stable individual differences by an inherent sense of fairness in outcome allocations. Using the event-related potential (ERP), this study investigated differences in fairness decision-making behavior and neural bases between individuals with prosocial and proself orientations using the Ultimatum Game (UG). Behavioral results indicated that prosocials were more prone to rejecting unfair offers with stronger negative emotional reactions compared with proselfs. ERP results revealed that prosocials showed a larger P2 when receiving fair offers than unfair ones in a very early processing stage, whereas such effect was absent in proselfs. In later processing stages, although both groups were sensitive to fairness as reflected by an enhanced medial frontal negativity (MFN) for unfair offers and a larger P3 for fair offers, prosocials exhibited a stronger fairness effect on these ERP components relative to proselfs. Furthermore, the fairness effect on the MFN mediated the SVO effect on rejecting unfair offers. Findings regarding emotional experiences, behavioral patterns and ERPs provide compelling evidence that SVO modulates fairness processing in social decision-making, whereas differences in neural responses to unfair vs fair offers as evidenced by the MFN appear to play important roles in the SVO effect on behavioral responses to unfairness.

psychology, experimental,neurosciences
Equity theory and fair inequality: A neuroeconomic study

Alexander W. Cappelen,Tom Eichele,Kenneth Hugdahl,Karsten Specht,Erik Ø. Sørensen,Bertil Tungodden

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1414602111

IF: 11.1

2014-10-13

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract:Significance People’s preferences for income distribution fundamentally affect their behavior and contribute to shaping important social and political institutions. The study of such preferences has become a major topic in behavioral research in social psychology and economics. Despite the large literature studying preferences for income distribution, there is no direct neuronal evidence of how the brain responds to income distributions when people have made different contributions in terms of work effort. The present paper reports from, to our knowledge, the first neuroimaging study designed to examine how the brain responds to the distribution of income in such situations. As such, to our knowledge it is also the first study to examine the neuronal basis for equity theory.
Neural mechanisms of the mood effects on third-party responses to injustice after unfair experiences

Enhui Xie,Mengdie Liu,Jieqiong Liu,Xiaoxue Gao,Xianchun Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.25874

2022-08-15

Abstract:Behavioral decision theory argues that humans can adjust their third-party responses (e.g., punishment and compensation) to injustice by integrating unfair experiences. Typically, the mood plays an important role in such a decision-making process. However, the underlying neurocognitive bases remain largely unclear. We first employ a modified third-party justice game in which an allocator split an amount of money between oneself and a receiver. The participants can reapportion the money as observers by choosing from the following three costly options: compensate the receiver, accept the current allocation, or punish the allocator. Then, a second-party pseudo interaction is conducted where participants receive more (i.e., advantageous unfair experience) or less (i.e., disadvantageous unfair experience) than others. Finally, participants perform the third-party justice game again after unfair experiences. Here, we use functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) to measure participants' brain activities during third-party responses to injustice. We find participants compensate more to the receiver after advantageous unfair experience, which involved enhanced positive emotion, weakened sense of unfairness, and is linked with increased activity in the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (rDLPFC). In contrast, participants punish more on the allocator after disadvantageous unfair experience, which might primarily stem from their negative emotional responses, strong sense of unfairness, and is associated with significantly decreased activity in the rDLPFC. Our results suggest that third-party compensation and punishment involved differential psychological and neural bases. Our findings highlight the crucial roles of second-party unfair experiences and the corresponding mood responses in third-party responses to unfairness, and unravel the intermediate neural architecture.

The low-flow or high-flow oxygen delivery system and a low-flow or high-flow nonrebreather mask.

Neural evidence for inequality-averse social preferences

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

Self-interest overrides rank-reversal aversion in resource distribution

The Neurocomputational Mechanism Underlying Decision-Making on Unfairness to Self and Others

Selfish behavior requires top-down control of prosocial motivation

Inequality signals in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex inform social preference models

Neural mechanisms of cooperation and fairness in iterative prisoner's dilemma

Distinguishing neural correlates of context-dependent advantageous- and disadvantageous-inequity aversion

Social status modulates the neural response to unfairness

The "motive cocktail" in altruistic behaviors

Predicting Human Behavior Toward Members of Different Social Groups.

Is Distributional Justice Equivalent to Prosocial Sharing in Children's Cognition?

Dopamine Modulates Egalitarian Behavior in Humans

Sex-based differences in fairness norm compliance and neural circuitry

Spatial gradient in activity within the insula reflects dissociable neural mechanisms underlying context-dependent advantageous and disadvantageous inequity aversion

Does Unfairness Evoke Anger or Disgust? A Quantitative Neurofunctional Dissection Based on 25 Years of Neuroimaging

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

Social value orientation modulates fairness processing during social decision-making: evidence from behavior and brain potentials

Equity theory and fair inequality: A neuroeconomic study

Neural mechanisms of the mood effects on third-party responses to injustice after unfair experiences