Our behavior is shaped by multiple factors, including direct feedback (seeing the outcomes of our past actions) and social observation (in part, via a drive to conform to other peoples' behaviors). However, it remains unclear how these two processes are linked in the context of behavioral change. This is important to investigate, as behavioral change is associated with distinct neural correlates that reflect specific aspects of processing, such as information integration and rule updating. To clarify whether these processes characterize both direct learning

Social expectations guide people's evaluations of others’ behaviors, but the origins of these expectations remain unclear. It is traditionally thought that people's expectations depend on their past observations of others’ behavior, and people harshly judge atypical behavior. Here, we considered that social expectations are also influenced by a drive for reciprocity, and people evaluate others’ actions by reflecting on their own decisions. To compare these views, we performed four studies. Study 1 used an Ultimatum Game task where participants alternated Responder and Proposer roles. Modeling participants’ expectations suggested they evaluated the fairness of received offers via comparisons to their own offers. Study 2 replicated these findings and showed that observing selfish behavior (lowball offers) only promoted acceptance of selfishness if observers started acting selfishly themselves. Study 3 generalized the findings, demonstrating that they also arise in the Public Goods Game, emerge cross‐culturally, and apply to antisocial punishment whereby selfish players punish generosity. Finally, Study 4 introduced the Trust Game and showed that participants trusted players who reciprocated their behavior, even if it was selfish, as much as they trusted generous players. Overall, this research shows that social expectations and evaluations are rooted in drives for reciprocity. This carries theoretical implications, speaking to a parallel in the mechanisms driving both decision‐making and social evaluations, along with practical importance for understanding and promoting cooperation.

Мета роботи полягала у вивченні особливостей джерел викликаної активності кори головного мозку та їх локалізації в лівшів та правшів під час класифікації стимулів, пов’язаних із локалізацією та формою об’єкта. У дослідженні брали участь 33 особи чоловічої статі, віком 18–20 років, які були поділені на дві групи – лівші (14 осіб) та правші (19 осіб). У досліджуваних осіб із лівим типом сенсомоторної асиметрії, незалежно від експериментальної ситуації, найбільш типові джерела електричної активності зафіксовані здебільшого в задньоасоціатівних ділянках лівої півкулі. У правшів розміщення диполів у двох експериментальних ситуаціях менш одноманітне. Так, під час першого тесту найбільш стаціонарні диполі зафіксовані в лівій півкулі, другого – у правій.