Perceived facial happiness during conversation correlates with insular and hypothalamus activity for humans, not robots. An investigation of the somatic marker hypothesis applied to social interactions.

The somatic marker hypothesis posits that perceiving emotions entails reenacting markers of self emotions, in particular in the autonomous nervous system. Well studied in decision-making tasks, it has not been tested in a social cognitive neuroscience framework, and in particular for the automatic processing of positive emotions during natural interactions. Here, we address this question using a unique corpus of brain activity recorded during unconstrained conversations between participants and a human or a humanoid robot. fMRI recordings are used to test whether activity in the most important brain regions in relation to the autonomic system, the amygdala, hypothalamus and insula, is affected by the level of happiness expressed by the human and robot agents. Results indicate that for the hypothalamus and the insula, in particular the anterior agranular region strongly involved in processing social emotions, activity in the right hemisphere increases with the level of happiness expressed by the human, but not the robot. Results indicate that perceiving positive emotions in social interactions induces the local brain responses predicted by the somatic marker hypothesis, but only when the interacting agent is a real human.

Gambling behavior versus moral behavior: methodological perspectives in neuroeconomic decision-making

Within the neuroeconomics field, there are two evident situations in which decisionmaking process do not respect the rule of expected utility: gambling and moral behaviors. In the case of gambling behavior, a tendency to engage in risky decision-making could lead to choose disadvantageous options (loss vs gain) and long-term negative economic consequences. Regarding moral behavior, subjects prefer options not always related to their expected utility, but more to their social and ethical significance (fair vs unfair). This commentary discusses both the theoretical and empirical basis of these behaviors, focusing on neurophysiological methods adopted to investigate commonalities and differences in physiological and behavioral subjects’ responses. The dichotomy between emotions and rationality will be explored considering two popular economics games, Iowa Gambling Task and Ultimatum Game, and will be discussed in the light of somatic marker hypothesis frame. We propose a multidimensional approach to describe more in-depth real-world decision-making situations in neuroeconomics.

Mediating role of attenuated physiological arousal on the association between psychopathic traits and fairness norm violation

The low-fear model of primary psychopathy has been supported by empirical findings such as attenuated physiological arousal in anticipation of threatening stimuli. The somatic marker hypothesis proposes that salient changes in the bodily state are processed as signals of whether a situation is good or bad and guide an individual to avoid potential adverse consequences. The present study aimed to elucidate the role that attenuated physiological arousal plays in the relationship between primary psychopathy and fairness norm violations both under the threat of punishment and under no potential for punishment. Primary psychopathy was associated with an attenuated skin conductance response prior to the choice of unfair monetary offers to another person, regardless of the potential for punishment. Attenuated skin conductance mediated the association between primary psychopathy and the choice of an unfair offer, especially in the no-punishment condition. However, in the punishment condition, primary psychopathy significantly predicted the choice of unfair offers even after controlling for the magnitude of skin conductance. The bodily response may have only a marginal effect on interpersonal decision-making under a threat of punishment. The present results suggest that the low-fear account of social norm violations as a function of primary psychopathy should be re-discussed.

VINERS Method for the Multiple Criteria Analysis and Neuromarketing of Best Places to Live

The best and worst places to live have been analysed in the world for many years and multiple criteria analysis has been used for that purpose. The quality of housing and its environment, pollution, green places, public spaces, physical movement and health, crime rates and individual safety, the wellbeing of youngsters, unemployment, job value, economic scarcity, governance, circadian rhythm, weekly rhythm and other factors are the focus of such analyses that aim to determine levels of positive emotions and happiness in built environment. Questionnaires are the most common tool for such analyses, where inhabitants are asked to rank their happiness experience as a whole in built environment. Many studies demonstrate that happy people are effective in multiple areas of their life including job efficiency, salary, health, human relations, etc. The innovative aspect of this research stems from the fact that biometric technologies (affective attitudes, emotional and physiological states) and the VINERS method developed by the authors are used to determine the best places to live and to serve neuro ads of homes for sale. To do this, rational segments of homebuyers are determined according to their demographic profiles (age, gender, education, marital status, families with children, main source of income), consumer psychographics and behaviour (happy, sad and angry along with valence and heart rate) and then select a rational video ad for such rational segment. The aim of our research is to develop the VINERS Method for the Multiple Criteria Analysis and Neuromarketing of Best Places to Live (VINERS method) by combining the Somatic Marker Hypothesis, biometrics, neuromarketing and COPRAS method. This article presents a case study to demonstrate the VINERS method put to practice.

A Somatic Marker Perspective of Political Decision Making

Decisions on matters affecting a group by a member of that group (e.g., decisions on a political choice) engage a mix of cognitive and emotion-based resources. Political decision-making involves rationality, but also empathy, intuition, compassion, morality, and fairness. Importantly, coping with uncertainty, assuming risk, dealing with huge responsibilities and resisting disappointment and considerable pressure are also crucial. Some of those decision-making elements from a neurocognitive framework proposed under the somatic marker hypothesis (SMH) are developed here. Based on the observation of abnormal decision-making characterizing patients with ventromedial prefrontal cortex (VMPFC), the SMH affords discussions of mechanisms involved in antisocial decision-making in the political realm, such as engaging in immoral and corrupt behaviors. In addition, the SMH sheds light on pivotal attributes required for good leadership and governance, such as resistance to pressure, risk-taking, seduction, and dominance, discussed with respect to modern theories of psychopathic tendencies in the context of political decision-making.

The Somatic Marker Hypothesis and Political Life

The somatic marker hypothesis has not always been fully understood, or properly applied, in political science. The hypothesis was developed to explain the personally and socially harmful decision-making of neurological patients who appeared to have largely intact cognitive skills. It posits that affect (consisting of emotions, feelings, and drives) facilitates and expands cognition, is grounded in states of bodily physiology and on the processing of those states in the entire nervous system, and is shaped by a person’s past experiences in similar situations. Thus far, it has received empirical support from lesion studies, experiments based on the Iowa Gambling Task, and brain imaging studies. The somatic marker hypothesis is not compatible with key assumptions on which various influential political and social approaches are based. It disagrees with the largely cognitive view of decision-making presented in rational choice analysis. Contrary to behavioral public policy, the somatic marker hypothesis emphasizes the extent to which affect and cognition are integrated and mutually enabling. Finally, it differs from poststructuralist frameworks by highlighting the constraints that evolutionarily older bodily and neuronal networks impose on decision-making. Rather, the somatic marker hypothesis implies that political decision-making is socially constructed yet subject to constraints, is often sluggish but also is prone to wholesale, occasional reversals, takes place at both conscious and unconscious levels, and subserves dynamic, sociocultural homeostasis.