Beyond lottery-evoked ambiguity aversion: The neural signature of the types and the sources of uncertainty.

Studies on decision-making under uncertainty have mainly focused on understanding preferences for either risk or ambiguity using standard lottery designs. However, people often face uncertainty that directly stems from interacting with other people, which may be processed differently from lottery-based uncertainty. Here, we substantially extend the investigation of uncertainty by examining a fourfold pattern of the sources and the types of uncertainty, assessing behavioral and neural responses to both risk and ambiguity across both social and non-social contexts. A key element in our research design was to control for participants' naturally occurring social beliefs, and taking these a priori beliefs into account allow us to elicit individual preferences in accordance with economic approaches that stress the dynamics of ambiguity preference as a function of underlying likelihoods. Using this design, we find a behavioral main effect of ambiguity aversion, with increasing ambiguity aversion as a function of higher beliefs regarding the likelihood of reciprocity, and related neural activity in the right IPS. This brain region was primarily involved when participants experienced lottery-based uncertainty as opposed to social uncertainty. However, we found that the right IFG was more involved when participants made decisions under social, as compared to non-social, uncertainty. Overall, therefore, the IPS may activate an analytic mindset, which might resonate more with a lottery than a social context, whereas the IFG is engaged when the context requires players to resolve uncertainty, such as unraveling the intentions behind the choice of another person.

A scarcity mindset alters neural processing underlying consumer decision making.

Not having enough of what one needs has long been shown to have detrimental consequences for decision making. Recent work suggests that the experience of insufficient resources can create a "scarcity" mindset; increasing attention toward the scarce resource itself, but at the cost of attention for unrelated aspects. To investigate the effects of a scarcity mindset on consumer choice behavior, as well as its underlying neural mechanisms, we used an experimental manipulation to induce both a scarcity and an abundance mindset within participants and examined the effects of both mindsets on participants' willingness to pay for familiar food items while being scanned using fMRI. Results demonstrated that a scarcity mindset affects neural mechanisms related to consumer decision making. When in a scarcity mindset compared with an abundance mindset, participants had increased activity in the orbitofrontal cortex, a region often implicated in valuation processes. Moreover, again compared with abundance, a scarcity mindset decreased activity in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, an area well known for its role in goal-directed choice. This effect was predominant in the group of participants who experienced scarcity following abundance, suggesting that the effects of scarcity are largest when they are compared with previous situations when resources were plentiful. More broadly, these data suggest a potential neural locus for a scarcity mindset and demonstrate how these changes in brain activity might underlie goal-directed decision making.

Decoding dynamic affective responses to naturalistic videos with shared neural patterns.

This study explored the feasibility of using shared neural patterns from brief affective episodes (viewing affective pictures) to decode extended, dynamic affective sequences in a naturalistic experience (watching movie-trailers). Twenty-eight participants viewed pictures from the International Affective Picture System (IAPS) and, in a separate session, watched various movie-trailers. We first located voxels at bilateral occipital cortex (LOC) responsive to affective picture categories by GLM analysis, then performed between-subject hyperalignment on the LOC voxels based on their responses during movie-trailer watching. After hyperalignment, we trained between-subject machine learning classifiers on the affective pictures, and used the classifiers to decode affective states of an out-of-sample participant both during picture viewing and during movie-trailer watching. Within participants, neural classifiers identified valence and arousal categories of pictures, and tracked self-reported valence and arousal during video watching. In aggregate, neural classifiers produced valence and arousal time series that tracked the dynamic ratings of the movie-trailers obtained from a separate sample. Our findings provide further support for the possibility of using pre-trained neural representations to decode dynamic affective responses during a naturalistic experience.

Neurobiological Mechanisms of Responding to Injustice.

People are particularly sensitive to injustice. Accordingly, deeper knowledge regarding the processes that underlie the perception of injustice, and the subsequent decisions to either punish transgressors or compensate victims, is of important social value. By combining a novel decision-making paradigm with functional neuroimaging, we identified specific brain networks that are involved with both the perception of, and response to, social injustice, with reward-related regions preferentially involved in punishment compared with compensation. Developing a computational model of punishment allowed for disentangling the neural mechanisms and psychological motives underlying decisions of whether to punish and, subsequently, of how severely to punish. Results show that the neural mechanisms underlying punishment differ depending on whether one is directly affected by the injustice, or whether one is a third-party observer of a violation occurring to another. Specifically, the anterior insula was involved in decisions to punish following harm, whereas, in third-party scenarios, we found amygdala activity associated with punishment severity. Additionally, we used a pharmacological intervention using oxytocin, and found that oxytocin influenced participants' fairness expectations, and in particular enhanced the frequency of low punishments. Together, these results not only provide more insight into the fundamental brain mechanisms underlying punishment and compensation, but also illustrate the importance of taking an explorative, multimethod approach when unraveling the complex components of everyday decision-making.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT The perception of injustice is a fundamental precursor to many disagreements, from small struggles at the dinner table to wasteful conflict between cultures and countries. Despite its clear importance, relatively little is known about how the brain processes these violations. Taking an interdisciplinary approach, we combine methods from neuroscience, psychology, and economics to explore the neurobiological mechanisms involved in both the perception of injustice as well as the punishment and compensation decisions that follow. Using a novel behavioral paradigm, we identified specific brain networks, developed a computational model of punishment, and found that administrating the neuropeptide oxytocin increases the administration of low punishments of norm violations in particular. Results provide valuable insights into the fundamental neurobiological mechanisms underlying social injustice.

Neural mechanisms underlying context-dependent shifts in risk preferences.

Studies of risky decision-making have demonstrated that humans typically prefer risky options after incurring a financial loss, while generally preferring safer options after a monetary gain. Here, we examined the neural processes underlying these inconsistent risk preferences by investigating the evaluation of gains and losses, and demonstrating how these responses can impact subsequent preference for either risky or safe choice options. Participants performed a task while undergoing fMRI in which they experienced both gains and losses. Immediately following a gain or loss, participants decided to either play or pass on a "double-or-quits" gamble. The outcome of the gamble could either double or eliminate their initial gain (from the time-estimation task) or redeem or double their initial loss. If they chose not to play this gamble, they retained the initial gain or loss. We demonstrate a shift in risk-taking preferences for identical sets of gambles as a function of previous gains or losses, with participants showing a greater preference towards riskier decisions in the context of a prior loss. An interaction between evaluating gain/loss contexts and subsequent behavioral risk pattern revealed an increased BOLD response in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC), with stronger responses for both gambling in a loss context and safety in a gain context. This suggests that the vmPFC is responsible for integrating these contextual effects, with these processes impacting on subsequent risky choice.

Decoding the role of the insula in human cognition: functional parcellation and large-scale reverse inference.

Recent work has indicated that the insula may be involved in goal-directed cognition, switching between networks, and the conscious awareness of affect and somatosensation. However, these findings have been limited by the insula's remarkably high base rate of activation and considerable functional heterogeneity. The present study used a relatively unbiased data-driven approach combining resting-state connectivity-based parcellation of the insula with large-scale meta-analysis to understand how the insula is anatomically organized based on functional connectivity patterns as well as the consistency and specificity of the associated cognitive functions. Our findings support a tripartite subdivision of the insula and reveal that the patterns of functional connectivity in the resting-state analysis appear to be relatively conserved across tasks in the meta-analytic coactivation analysis. The function of the networks was meta-analytically "decoded" using the Neurosynth framework and revealed that while the dorsoanterior insula is more consistently involved in human cognition than ventroanterior and posterior networks, each parcellated network is specifically associated with a distinct function. Collectively, this work suggests that the insula is instrumental in integrating disparate functional systems involved in processing affect, sensory-motor processing, and general cognition and is well suited to provide an interface between feelings, cognition, and action.

Reappraising the ultimatum: an fMRI study of emotion regulation and decision making.

Emotion regulation strategies provide a means by which to modulate our social behavior. In this study, we investigated the effect of using reappraisal to both up- and downregulate social decision making. After being instructed on how to use reappraisal, participants played the Ultimatum Game while undergoing functional magnetic resonance imaging and applied the strategies of upregulation (reappraising the proposer's intentions as more negative), down-regulation (reappraising the proposer's intentions as less negative), as well as a baseline "look" condition. As hypothesized, when reappraising, decision acceptance rates were altered, with a greater number of unfair offers accepted while down-regulating and a greater number of unfair offers rejected while upregulating, both relative to the baseline condition. At the neural level, during reappraisal, significant activations were observed in the inferior and middle frontal gyrus (MFG), in addition to the medial prefrontal cortex and cingulate gyrus for unfair offers only. Regulated decisions involved left inferior frontal gyrus for upregulation and MFG for down-regulation strategies, respectively. Importantly, the effects of emotion modulation were evident in posterior insula, with less activation for down-regulation and more activation for upregulation in these areas. Notably, we show for the first time that top-down strategies such as reappraisal strongly affect our socioeconomic decisions.

Moral decision-making in context: Behavioral and neural processes underlying allocations based on need, merit, and equality.

How to fairly allocate goods is a key issue of social decision-making. Extensive research demonstrates that people do not selfishly maximize their own benefits, but instead also consider how others are affected. However, most accounts of the psychological processes underlying fairness-related behavior implicitly assume that assessments of fairness are somewhat stable. In this paper, we present results of a novel task, the Re-Allocation Game, in which two players receive an allocation determined by the computer and, on half of the trials, one player has the subsequent possibility to change this allocation. Importantly, prior to the receipt of the allocation, players were shown either their respective financial situations, their respective performance on a previous simple task, or random information, while being scanned using functional neuroimaging. As expected, our results demonstrate when given the opportunity, participants allocated on average almost half the money to anonymous others. However, our findings further show that participants used the provided information in a dynamic manner, revealing the underlying principle based on which people re-allocate money - namely based on merit, need, or equality - switches dynamically. On the neural level, we identified activity in the right and left dorsolateral prefrontal cortices related to context-independent inequity and context-dependent fairness information respectively when viewing the computer-generated allocations. At the same time, activity in the temporoparietal and precuneus represented these different types of fairness-related information in adjacent and partially overlapping clusters. Finally, we observed that the activity pattern in the precuneus and putamen was most clearly related to participants' subsequent re-allocation decisions. Together, our findings suggest that participants judge an allocation as fair or unfair using a network associated with cognitive control and theory-of-mind, while dynamically switching between what might constitute a fair allocation in a particular context.

Computational modeling of social decision-making.

Social decision-making is guided by a complex set of social norms. Computational modeling can play a significant role in enriching our understanding of these norms and how precisely they direct social choices. Here, we highlight three major advantages to using computational modeling, particularly models derived from Utility Theory, in the study of social norms. We illustrate how such models can help generate detailed processes of decision-making, enforce theoretical precision by delineating abstract concepts, and unpack when, and why, people adhere to specific social norms. For each benefit, we discuss a recent study which has employed modeling in the service of assessing the role of norms in decision-making, collectively revealing how computational modeling enables better prediction, description, and explanation of important social choices.

Moral judgment of objectionable online content: Reporting decisions and punishment preferences on social media.

Harmful and inappropriate online content is prevalent, necessitating the need to understand how individuals judge and wish to mitigate the spread of negative content on social media. In an online study with a diverse sample of social media users (n = 294), we sought to elucidate factors that influence individuals' evaluation of objectionable online content. Participants were presented with images varying in moral valence, each accompanied by an indicator of intention from an ostensible content poster. Half of the participants were assigned the role of user content moderator, while the remaining participants were instructed to respond as they normally would online. The study aimed to establish whether moral imagery, the intention of a content poster, and the perceived responsibility of social media users, affect judgments of objectionability, operationalized through both decisions to flag content and preferences to seek punishment of other users. Our findings reveal that moral imagery strongly influences users' assessments of what is appropriate online content, with participants almost exclusively choosing to report and punish morally negative images. Poster intention also plays a significant role in user's decisions, with greater objection shown to morally negative content when it has been shared by another user for the purpose of showing support for it. Bestowing a content moderation role affected reporting behaviour but not punishment preferences. We also explore individual user characteristics, finding a negative association between trust in social media platforms and reporting decisions. Conversely, a positive relationship was identified between trait empathy and reporting rates. Collectively, our insights highlight the complexity of social media users' moderation decisions and preferences. The results advance understanding of moral judgments and punishment preferences online, and offer insights for platforms and regulatory bodies aiming to better understand social media users' role in content moderation.

Testosterone inhibits trust but promotes reciprocity.

The steroid hormone testosterone has been associated with behavior intended to obtain or maintain high social status. Although such behavior is typically characterized as aggressive and competitive, it is clear that high social status is achieved and maintained not only through antisocial behavior but also through prosocial behavior. In the present experiment, we investigated the impact of testosterone administration on trust and reciprocity using a double-blind randomized control design. We found that a single dose of 0.5 mg of testosterone decreased trust but increased generosity when repaying trust. These findings suggest that testosterone may mediate different types of status-seeking behavior. It may increase competitive, potentially aggressive, and antisocial behavior when social challenges and threats (i.e., abuse of trust and betrayal) need to be considered; however, it may promote prosocial behavior in the absence of these threats, when high status and good reputation may be best served by prosocial behavior.

Anxious ultimatums: how anxiety disorders affect socioeconomic behaviour.

Although the role of emotion in socioeconomic decision making is increasingly recognised, the impact of specific emotional disorders, such as anxiety disorders, on these decisions has been surprisingly neglected. Twenty anxious patients and twenty matched controls completed a commonly used socioeconomic task (the Ultimatum Game), in which they had to accept or reject monetary offers from other players. Anxious patients accepted significantly more unfair offers than controls. We discuss the implications of these findings in light of recent models of anxiety, in particular the importance of interpersonal factors and assertiveness in an integrated model of decision making. Finally, we were able to show that pharmacological serotonin used to treat anxious symptomatology tended to normalise decision making, further confirming and extending the role of serotonin in co-operation, prosocial behaviour, and social decision making. These results show, for the first time, a different pattern of socioeconomic behaviour in anxiety disordered patients, in addition to the known memory, attentional and emotional biases that are part of this pathological condition.

An experimental study of information transparency and social preferences on donation behaviors: the self-signaling model.

Certain segments of the population reply on charitable or other non-governmental organizations as their main source of support, with these organizations largely funded by those in society who can afford to give. The present study investigated to what extent information transparency influences donation decisions, and whether specific preferences for charities influences information seeking behavior. We recruited 114 participants via Prolific and employed a binary online Dictator Game to address these two study objectives. The results showed that participants' actual donation behavior was not influenced by their charity preference or the level of information transparency. However, they were more prone to seek out additional information when deciding about the most preferred category of charity. These results raise important questions as to whether the perceived anonymity of online choices may differ from choices carried out in person.

The neural mechanisms of affect infusion in social economic decision-making: a mediating role of the anterior insula.

Though emotions have been shown to have sometimes dramatic effects on decision-making, the neural mechanisms mediating these biases are relatively unexplored. Here, we investigated how incidental affect (i.e. emotional states unrelated to the decision at hand) may influence decisions, and how these biases are implemented in the brain. Nineteen adult participants made decisions which involved accepting or rejecting monetary offers from others in an Ultimatum Game while undergoing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Prior to each set of decisions, participants watched a short video clip aimed at inducing either a sad or neutral emotional state. Results demonstrated that, as expected, sad participants rejected more unfair offers than those in the neutral condition. Neuroimaging analyses revealed that receiving unfair offers while in a sad mood elicited activity in brain areas related to aversive emotional states and somatosensory integration (anterior insula) and to cognitive conflict (anterior cingulate cortex). Sad participants also showed a diminished sensitivity in neural regions associated with reward processing (ventral striatum). Importantly, insular activation uniquely mediated the relationship between sadness and decision bias. This study is the first to reveal how subtle mood states can be integrated at the neural level to influence decision-making.

The herding hormone: oxytocin stimulates in-group conformity.

People often conform to others with whom they associate. Surprisingly, however, little is known about the possible hormonal mechanisms that may underlie in-group conformity. Here, we examined whether conformity toward one's in-group is altered by oxytocin, a neuropeptide often implicated in social behavior. After administration of either oxytocin or a placebo, participants were asked to provide attractiveness ratings of unfamiliar visual stimuli. While viewing each stimulus, participants were shown ratings of that stimulus provided by both in-group and out-group members. Results demonstrated that on trials in which the ratings of the in-group and out-group were incongruent, the ratings of participants given oxytocin conformed to the ratings of their in-group but not of their out-group. Participants given a placebo did not show this in-group bias. These findings indicate that administration of oxytocin can influence subjective preferences, and they support the view that oxytocin's effects on social behavior are context dependent.

The neuroscience of social decision-making.

Given that we live in highly complex social environments, many of our most important decisions are made in the context of social interactions. Simple but sophisticated tasks from a branch of experimental economics known as game theory have been used to study social decision-making in the laboratory setting, and a variety of neuroscience methods have been used to probe the underlying neural systems. This approach is informing our knowledge of the neural mechanisms that support decisions about trust, reciprocity, altruism, fairness, revenge, social punishment, social norm conformity, social learning, and competition. Neural systems involved in reward and reinforcement, pain and punishment, mentalizing, delaying gratification, and emotion regulation are commonly recruited for social decisions. This review also highlights the role of the prefrontal cortex in prudent social decision-making, at least when social environments are relatively stable. In addition, recent progress has been made in understanding the neural bases of individual variation in social decision-making.

Interactive decision-making in people with schizotypal traits: a game theory approach.

Studies that have investigated whether deficits in social cognition observed in schizophrenia are also present in schizotypal individuals have largely been inconclusive, and none of these studies have examined social interactive behavior. Here, we investigated interactive decision-making behavior in individuals differing in the amount of schizotypal symptoms using tasks derived from Game Theory. In total 1691 undergraduate students were screened with the Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire-Brief version. We selected 69 people distributed across the full schizotypal continuum to participate in Ultimatum and Dictator Games in which they played against human and non-human, computer partners. The results showed that higher levels of schizotypal symptoms, particularly positive and disorganized schizotypy, were related to proposing higher offers to all partners. Additionally, the amount of interpersonal schizotypal symptoms was associated with an increased acceptance rate of very unfair offers from human partners, possibly reflecting a blunted emotional response to such offers. We conclude that positive and disorganized schizotypal symptoms are associated with less adequate bargaining behavior, similar to what has been recently observed in patients with schizophrenia. The observed similarities on Ultimatum Game behavior between patients with schizophrenia and individuals with more schizotypal symptoms contribute to the growing evidence that social cognitive deficits may represent a marker of vulnerability to schizophrenia.

The Effect of Centralized Financial and Social Incentives on Cooperative Behavior and Its Underlying Neural Mechanisms.

Incentives are frequently used by governments and employers to encourage cooperation. Here, we investigated the effect of centralized incentives on cooperation, firstly in a behavioral study and then replicated in a subsequent neuroimaging (fMRI) study. In both studies, participants completed a novel version of the Public Goods Game, including experimental conditions in which the administration of centralized incentives was probabilistic and incentives were either of a financial or social nature. Behavioral results showed that the prospect of potentially receiving financial and social incentives significantly increased cooperation, with financial incentives yielding the strongest effect. Neuroimaging results showed that activation in the bilateral lateral orbitofrontal cortex and precuneus increased when participants were informed that incentives would be absent versus when they were present. Furthermore, activation in the medial orbitofrontal cortex increased when participants would potentially receive a social versus a financial incentive. These results speak to the efficacy of different types of centralized incentives in increasing cooperative behavior, and they show that incentives directly impact the neural mechanisms underlying cooperation.

Two distinct and separable processes underlie individual differences in algorithm adherence: Differences in predictions and differences in trust thresholds.

Algorithms play an increasingly ubiquitous and vitally important role in modern society. However, recent findings suggest substantial individual variability in the degree to which people make use of such algorithmic systems, with some users preferring the advice of algorithms whereas others selectively avoid algorithmic systems. The mechanisms that give rise to these individual differences are currently poorly understood. Previous studies have suggested two possible effects that may underlie this variability: users may differ in their predictions of the efficacy of algorithmic systems, and/or in the relative thresholds they hold to place trust in these systems. Based on a novel judgment task with a large number of within-subject repetitions, here we report evidence that both mechanisms exert an effect on experimental participant's degree of algorithm adherence, but, importantly, that these two mechanisms are independent from each-other. Furthermore, participants are more likely to place their trust in an algorithmically managed fund if their first exposure to the task was with an algorithmic manager. These findings open the door for future research into the mechanisms driving individual differences in algorithm adherence, and allow for novel interventions to increase adherence to algorithms.

Expect the Worst! Expectations and Social Interactive Decision Making.

Psychological studies have demonstrated that expectations can have substantial effects on choice behavior, although the role of expectations on social decision making in particular has been relatively unexplored. To broaden our knowledge, we examined the role of expectations on decision making when interacting with new game partners and then also in a subsequent interaction with the same partners. To perform this, 38 participants played an Ultimatum Game (UG) in the role of responders and were primed to expect to play with two different groups of proposers, either those that were relatively fair (a tendency to propose an equal split-the high expectation condition) or unfair (with a history of offering unequal splits-the low expectation condition). After playing these 40 UG rounds, they then played 40 Dictator Games (DG) as allocator with the same set of partners. The results showed that expectations affect UG decisions, with a greater proportion of unfair offers rejected from the high as compared to the low expectation group, suggesting that players utilize specific expectations of social interaction as a behavioral reference point. Importantly, this was evident within subjects. Interestingly, we also demonstrated that these expectation effects carried over to the subsequent DG. Participants allocated more money to the recipients of the high expectation group as well to those who made equal offers and, in particular, when the latter were expected to behave unfairly, suggesting that people tend to forgive negative violations and appreciate and reward positive violations. Therefore, both the expectations of others' behavior and their violations play an important role in subsequent allocation decisions. Together, these two studies extend our knowledge of the role of expectations in social decision making.