The science of justice: The neuropsychology of social punishment.

The social punishment (SP) of norm violations has received much attention across multiple disciplines. However, current models of SP fail to consider the role of motivational processes, and none can explain the observed behavioral and neuropsychological differences between the two recognized forms of SP: second-party punishment (2PP) and third-party punishment (3PP). After reviewing the literature giving rise to the current models of SP, we propose a unified model of SP which integrates general psychological descriptions of decision-making as a confluence of affect, cognition, and motivation, with evidence that SP is driven by two main factors: the amount of harm (assessed primarily in the salience network) and the norm violator's intention (assessed primarily in the default-mode and central-executive networks). We posit that motivational differences between 2PP and 3PP, articulated in mesocorticolimbic pathways, impact final SP by differentially impacting the assessments of harm and intention done in these domain-general large-scale networks. This new model will lead to a better understanding of SP, which might even improve forensic, procedural, and substantive legal practices.

Intrinsic functional connectivity of the frontoparietal network predicts inter-individual differences in the propensity for costly third-party punishment.

Humans are motivated to give norm violators their just deserts through costly punishment even as unaffected third parties (i.e., third-party punishment, TPP). A great deal of individual variability exists in costly punishment; however, how this variability particularly in TPP is represented by the brain's intrinsic network architecture remains elusive. Here, we examined whether inter-individual differences in the propensity for TPP can be predicted based on resting-state functional connectivity (RSFC) combining an economic TPP game with task-free functional neuroimaging and a multivariate prediction framework. Our behavioral results revealed that TPP punishment increased with the severity of unfairness for offers. People with higher TPP propensity punished more harshly across norm-violating scenarios. Our neuroimaging findings showed RSFC within the frontoparietal network predicted individual differences in TPP propensity. Our findings contribute to understanding the neural fingerprint for an individual's propensity to costly punish strangers, and shed some light on how social norm enforcement behaviors are represented by the brain's intrinsic network architecture.

Assessment of insecticidal effects and selectivity of CAPA-PK peptide analogues against the peach-potato aphid and four beneficial insects following topical exposure.

BACKGROUND: Insect Capability neuropeptides (CAP2b/CAPA-PKs) play a critical role in modulating different physiologies and behavior in insects. In a previous proof-of-concept study, the CAP2b analogues 1895 (2Abf-Suc-FGPRLamide) and 2129 (2Abf-Suc-ATPRIamide) were reported to reduce aphid fitness when administered by injection. In the current study, the insecticidal efficacy of 1895 and 2129 on the peach potato aphid Myzus persicae was analyzed by topical application, simulating a spray application scenario in the field. Additionally, the selectivity of the tested analogues was evaluated against a selection of beneficial insects, namely three natural enemies (Adalia bipunctata, Chrysoperla carnea and Nasonia vitripennis) and a pollinator (Bombus terrestris). RESULTS: Within 3-5 days post topical exposure of aphids to 1895, higher mortality (33%) was observed, as was the case for the treatment with 2129 (17%) and the mixture of 1895 + 2129 (47%) compared to the control (3%). 1895 and the mix 1895 + 2129 showed the strongest and comparable insecticidal effects. Additionally, surviving aphids treated with 1895 showed a reduction in total lifetime reproduction (GRR) of 30%, 19% with 2129 and 39% with the mix 1895 + 2129. Of interest from a biosafety perspective is that by using the same delivery method and dose, no significant effects on survival, weight increase and food intake was observed for the representative natural enemies and the pollinator. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the potential of exploiting CAP2b analogues such as 1895 (core structure FGPRL) as aphicides. Additionally, the CAP2b analogues used in this study were selective as they showed no effects when applied on four representative beneficial insects.