scholarly journals Neural representations of stereotype content predict social decisions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenji Kobayashi ◽  
Joseph W Kable ◽  
Ming Hsu ◽  
Adrianna C Jenkins
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Activity Patterns ◽  
Inequity Aversion ◽  
Dependent Manner ◽  
Temporoparietal Junction ◽  
Neural Representations ◽  
Stereotype Content ◽  
Social Decisions ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Social Decision Making

Perceptions of others' traits based on social group membership (stereotypes) are known to affect social behavior, but little is known about the neural mechanisms mediating these effects. Here, using fMRI and representational similarity analysis (RSA), we investigated neural representations of others' traits and their contributions to social decision making. Behaviorally, perceptions of others' traits, captured by a two-dimensional framework, biased participants' monetary allocation choices in a context-dependent manner: recipients' perceived warmth increased advantageous inequity aversion and competence increased disadvantageous inequity aversion. Neurally, RSA revealed that stereotypes about others' traits were represented in activity patterns in the temporoparietal junction and superior temporal sulcus, two regions associated with mentalizing, and in the lateral orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), known to represent latent environmental features during goal-directed outcome inference. Critically, only the latter predicted individual choices, suggesting that the effect of stereotypes on behavior is mediated by inference-based, goal-directed decision-making processes in the OFC.

scholarly journals A Computational Model of Non-optimal Suspiciousness in the Minnesota Trust Game

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Kazinka ◽  
Iris Vilares ◽  
Angus MacDonald
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Risk Aversion ◽  
Computational Model ◽  
Inequity Aversion ◽  
Trust Game ◽  
Social Decision ◽  
Future Studies ◽  
Two Samples ◽  
Highly Correlated ◽  
Social Decision Making

This study modeled spite sensitivity (the worry that others are willing to incur a loss to hurt you), which is thought to undergird suspiciousness and persecutory ideation. Two samples performed a parametric, non-iterative trust game known as the Minnesota Trust Game (MTG). The MTG is designed to distinguish suspicious decision-making from otherwise rational mistrust by incentivizing the player to trust in certain situations. Individuals who do not trust even under these circumstances are particularly suspicious of their potential partner’s intentions. In Sample 1, 243 undergraduates who completed the MTG showed less trust as the amount of money they could lose increased. However, for choices where partners had a financial disincentive to betray the player, variation in the willingness to trust the partner was associated with suspicious beliefs. To further examine spite sensitivity, we modified the Fehr-Schmidt (1999) inequity aversion model, which compares unequal outcomes in social decision-making tasks, to include the possibility for spite sensitivity. In this case, an anticipated partner’s dislike of advantageous inequity (i.e., guilt) parameter could take on negative values, with negative guilt indicating spite. We hypothesized that the anticipated guilt parameter would be strongly related to suspicious beliefs. Our modification of the Fehr-Schmidt model improved estimation of MTG behavior. We isolated the estimation of partner’s spite-guilt, which was highly correlated with choices most associated with persecutory ideation. We replicated our findings in a second sample, where the estimated spite-guilt parameter correlated with self-reported suspiciousness. The “Suspiciousness” condition, unique to the MTG, can be modeled to isolate spite sensitivity, suggesting that spite sensitivity is separate from inequity aversion or risk aversion, and may provide a means to quantify persecution. The MTG offers promise for future studies to quantify persecutory beliefs in clinical populations.

scholarly journals Pain and social decision-making: New insights from the social framing effect

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 221-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruolei Gu ◽  
Jie Liu ◽  
Fang Cui
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Brain Area ◽  
Framing Effect ◽  
Neural Activation ◽  
Social Emotions ◽  
Temporoparietal Junction ◽  
Social Decision ◽  
The Social ◽  
Social Decision Making

This paper focuses on the social function of painful experience as revealed by recent studies on social decision-making. Observing others suffering from physical pain evokes empathic reactions that can lead to prosocial behavior (e.g., helping others at a cost to oneself), which might be regarded as the social value of pain derived from evolution. Feelings of guilt may also be elicited when one takes responsibility for another’s pain. These social emotions play a significant role in various cognitive processes and may affect behavioral preferences. In addition, the influence of others’ pain on decision-making is highly sensitive to social context. Combining neuroimaging techniques with a novel decision paradigm, we found that when asking participants to trade-off personal benefits against providing help to other people, verbally describing the causal relationship between their decision and other people’s pain (i.e., framing) significantly changed participants’ preferences. This social framing effect was associated with neural activation in the temporoparietal junction (TPJ), which is a brain area that is important in social cognition and in social emotions. Further, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on this region successfully modulated the magnitude of the social framing effect. These findings add to the knowledge about the role of perception of others’ pain in our social life.

scholarly journals Neural mechanisms of social decision-making in the primate amygdala

2015 ◽  
Vol 112 (52) ◽  
pp. 16012-16017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve W. C. Chang ◽  
Nicholas A. Fagan ◽  
Koji Toda ◽  
Amanda V. Utevsky ◽  
John M. Pearson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Behavior ◽  
Basolateral Amygdala ◽  
Social Preferences ◽  
Dictator Game ◽  
The Gaze ◽  
Social Decisions ◽  
The Social ◽  
Context Specific ◽  
Social Decision Making

Social decisions require evaluation of costs and benefits to oneself and others. Long associated with emotion and vigilance, the amygdala has recently been implicated in both decision-making and social behavior. The amygdala signals reward and punishment, as well as facial expressions and the gaze of others. Amygdala damage impairs social interactions, and the social neuropeptide oxytocin (OT) influences human social decisions, in part, by altering amygdala function. Here we show in monkeys playing a modified dictator game, in which one individual can donate or withhold rewards from another, that basolateral amygdala (BLA) neurons signaled social preferences both across trials and across days. BLA neurons mirrored the value of rewards delivered to self and others when monkeys were free to choose but not when the computer made choices for them. We also found that focal infusion of OT unilaterally into BLA weakly but significantly increased both the frequency of prosocial decisions and attention to recipients for context-specific prosocial decisions, endorsing the hypothesis that OT regulates social behavior, in part, via amygdala neuromodulation. Our findings demonstrate both neurophysiological and neuroendocrinological connections between primate amygdala and social decisions.

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

2018 ◽  
Vol 115 (33) ◽  
pp. E7680-E7689 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoxue Gao ◽  
Hongbo Yu ◽  
Ignacio Sáez ◽  
Philip R. Blue ◽  
Lusha Zhu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Prefrontal Cortex ◽  
Computational Models ◽  
Social Contexts ◽  
Inequity Aversion ◽  
Context Dependency ◽  
Anterior Cingulate ◽  
Dorsal Anterior Cingulate Cortex ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Context Dependent

Humans can integrate social contextual information into decision-making processes to adjust their responses toward inequity. This context dependency emerges when individuals receive more (i.e., advantageous inequity) or less (i.e., disadvantageous inequity) than others. However, it is not clear whether context-dependent processing of advantageous and disadvantageous inequity involves differential neurocognitive mechanisms. Here, we used fMRI to address this question by combining an interactive game that modulates social contexts (e.g., interpersonal guilt) with computational models that enable us to characterize individual weights on inequity aversion. In each round, the participant played a dot estimation task with an anonymous coplayer. The coplayer would receive pain stimulation with 50% probability when either of them responded incorrectly. At the end of each round, the participant completed a variant of dictator game, which determined payoffs for him/herself and the coplayer. Computational modeling demonstrated the context dependency of inequity aversion: when causing pain to the coplayer (i.e., guilt context), participants cared more about the advantageous inequity and became more tolerant of the disadvantageous inequity, compared with other conditions. Consistently, neuroimaging results suggested the two types of inequity were associated with differential neurocognitive substrates. While the context-dependent processing of advantageous inequity was associated with social- and mentalizing-related processes, involving left anterior insula, right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, and dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, the context-dependent processing of disadvantageous inequity was primarily associated with emotion- and conflict-related processes, involving left posterior insula, right amygdala, and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex. These results extend our understanding of decision-making processes related to inequity aversion.

scholarly journals Dynamic afferent synapses to decision-making networks improve performance in tasks requiring stimulus associations and discriminations

2012 ◽  
Vol 108 (2) ◽  
pp. 513-527 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark A. Bourjaily ◽  
Paul Miller
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Firing Rate ◽  
Activity Patterns ◽  
Recurrent Network ◽  
Optimal Decision ◽  
Dependent Manner ◽  
Synaptic Facilitation ◽  
Winner Takes All ◽  
Optimal Decision Making ◽  
Exclusive Or

Animals must often make opposing responses to similar complex stimuli. Multiple sensory inputs from such stimuli combine to produce stimulus-specific patterns of neural activity. It is the differences between these activity patterns, even when small, that provide the basis for any differences in behavioral response. In the present study, we investigate three tasks with differing degrees of overlap in the inputs, each with just two response possibilities. We simulate behavioral output via winner-takes-all activity in one of two pools of neurons forming a biologically based decision-making layer. The decision-making layer receives inputs either in a direct stimulus-dependent manner or via an intervening recurrent network of neurons that form the associative layer, whose activity helps distinguish the stimuli of each task. We show that synaptic facilitation of synapses to the decision-making layer improves performance in these tasks, robustly increasing accuracy and speed of responses across multiple configurations of network inputs. Conversely, we find that synaptic depression worsens performance. In a linearly nonseparable task with exclusive-or logic, the benefit of synaptic facilitation lies in its superlinear transmission: effective synaptic strength increases with presynaptic firing rate, which enhances the already present superlinearity of presynaptic firing rate as a function of stimulus-dependent input. In linearly separable single-stimulus discrimination tasks, we find that facilitating synapses are always beneficial because synaptic facilitation always enhances any differences between inputs. Thus we predict that for optimal decision-making accuracy and speed, synapses from sensory or associative areas to decision-making or premotor areas should be facilitating.

Social Decision-Making: Insights from Game Theory and Neuroscience

Science ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 318 (5850) ◽  
pp. 598-602 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan G. Sanfey
Keyword(s):  
Game Theory ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Exchange ◽  
Theoretical Models ◽  
Social Decision ◽  
Affective Factors ◽  
Social Decisions ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Competitive Games ◽  
Social Decision Making

By combining the models and tasks of Game Theory with modern psychological and neuroscientific methods, the neuroeconomic approach to the study of social decision-making has the potential to extend our knowledge of brain mechanisms involved in social decisions and to advance theoretical models of how we make decisions in a rich, interactive environment. Research has already begun to illustrate how social exchange can act directly on the brain's reward system, how affective factors play an important role in bargaining and competitive games, and how the ability to assess another's intentions is related to strategic play. These findings provide a fruitful starting point for improved models of social decision-making, informed by the formal mathematical approach of economics and constrained by known neural mechanisms.

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

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoxue Gao ◽  
Hongbo Yu ◽  
Ignacio Saez ◽  
Philip R. Blue ◽  
Lusha Zhu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Prefrontal Cortex ◽  
Inequity Aversion ◽  
Neural Mechanisms ◽  
Anterior Cingulate ◽  
Spatial Gradient ◽  
Model Free ◽  
Interpersonal Guilt ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Context Dependent

AbstractHumans 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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document