Predicting Persuasion-Induced Behavior Change from the Brain

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

O’Donnell

Cascio

et al. 2015

163

139

Health communications can be an effective way to increase positive health behaviors and decrease negative health behaviors; however, those at highest risk are often most defensive and least open to such messages. For example, increasing physical activity among sedentary individuals affects a wide range of important mental and physical health outcomes, but has proven a challenging task. Affirming core values (i.e., self-affirmation) before message exposure is a psychological technique that can increase the effectiveness of a wide range of interventions in health and other domains; however, the neural mechanisms of affirmation's effects have not been studied. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to examine neural processes associated with affirmation effects during exposure to potentially threatening health messages. We focused on an a priori defined region of interest (ROI) in ventromedial prefrontal cortex (VMPFC), a brain region selected for its association with self-related processing and positive valuation. Consistent with our hypotheses, those in the self-affirmation condition produced more activity in VMPFC during exposure to health messages and went on to increase their objectively measured activity levels more. These findings suggest that affirmation of core values may exert its effects by allowing at-risk individuals to see the self-relevance and value in otherwise-threatening messages.self-affirmation | fMRI | behavior change | VMPFC | physical activity

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Self-affirmationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Potential Neural Mechanisms Of Affirmationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Self-affirmation alters the brain’s response to health messages and subsequent behavior change

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

O’Donnell

Cascio

et al. 2015

163

139

“…VMPFC is known to integrate multiple types of value signals [23] from limbic and prefrontal regions [35], which may serve as a summary value signal in response to social influence. Indeed, individual differences in VMPFC activity during persuasive message exposure successfully predicted participants' changes in sunscreen use one week after the scanning session compared to baseline usage beyond the participants' self-reported attitudes toward sunscreen and intentions to change their behavior [36]. In addition, research examining the effectiveness of smoking quit messages found that increased activity in the VMPFC during ad exposure predicted reductions in smoking one month following the scanning session compared to baseline beyond a number of self-report measures collected [37].…”

Section: Predicting Behavior Changementioning

confidence: 92%

Social influence and the brain: persuasion, susceptibility to influence and retransmission

Cascio

Scholz

Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences

2015

Social influence is an important topic of research, with a particularly long history in the social sciences. Recently, social influence has also become a topic of interest among neuroscientists. The aim of this review is to highlight current research that has examined neural systems associated with social influence, from the perspective of being influenced as well as influencing others, and highlight studies that link neural mechanisms with real-world behavior change beyond the laboratory. Although many of the studies reviewed focus on localizing brain regions implicated in influence within the lab, we argue that approaches that account for networks of brain regions and that integrate neural data with data beyond the laboratory are likely to be most fruitful in understanding influence. AbstractSocial influence is an important topic of research, with a particularly long history in the social sciences. Recently, social influence has also become a topic of interest among neuroscientists.The aim of this review is to highlight current research that has examined neural systems associated with social influence, from the perspective of being influenced as well as influencing others, and highlight studies that link neural mechanisms with real-world behavior change beyond the laboratory. Although many of the studies reviewed focus on localizing brain regions implicated in influence within the lab, we argue that approaches that account for networks of brain regions and that integrate neural data with data beyond the laboratory are likely to be most fruitful in understanding influence.

“…With this in mind, neural variables (e.g., structure, function, connectivity) can be hypothesized in advance and treated as predictor variables of relevant population level outcomes (103). This use of neuroimaging methods may contribute explanatory power that is not readily available from other sources and may be a source of convergent validity for identifying the best measures of behavior (103)(104)(105). Moreover, increasingly, there has been a shift from the assumption that the brain is only a dependent or independent variable but also can be a moderator and mediator of paths from experience to behavior or between genes, brain, and behavior (56,61,102,103,106).…”

Section: )mentioning

confidence: 99%

What is a representative brain? Neuroscience meets population science

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Hyde

Mitchell³

et al. 2013

231

191

The last decades of neuroscience research have produced immense progress in the methods available to understand brain structure and function. Social, cognitive, clinical, affective, economic, communication, and developmental neurosciences have begun to map the relationships between neuro-psychological processes and behavioral outcomes, yielding a new understanding of human behavior and promising interventions. However, a limitation of this fast moving research is that most findings are based on small samples of convenience. Furthermore, our understanding of individual differences may be distorted by unrepresentative samples, undermining findings regarding brain-behavior mechanisms. These limitations are issues that social demographers, epidemiologists, and other population scientists have tackled, with solutions that can be applied to neuroscience. By contrast, nearly all social science disciplines, including social demography, sociology, political science, economics, communication science, and psychology, make assumptions about processes that involve the brain, but have incorporated neural measures to differing, and often limited, degrees; many still treat the brain as a black box. In this article, we describe and promote a perspective-population neuroscience-that leverages interdisciplinary expertise to (i) emphasize the importance of sampling to more clearly define the relevant populations and sampling strategies needed when using neuroscience methods to address such questions; and (ii) deepen understanding of mechanisms within population science by providing insight regarding underlying neural mechanisms. Doing so will increase our confidence in the generalizability of the findings. We provide examples to illustrate the population neuroscience approach for specific types of research questions and discuss the potential for theoretical and applied advances from this approach across areas.neuroimaging | life course | statistics | survey methodology | physics Why Population Neuroscience? How do biology, social situations, and the broader environmental context interact to guide behavior, health, and development? This question is fundamental to most, if not all, social and behavioral sciences. We argue that to effectively address the many topics that stem from this larger question across disciplines, it is necessary to (i) bring a "population perspective" to neuroscience and (ii) leverage neuroscience tools within population sciences, which are subdisciplines of many fields, areas, and departments focused on documenting and understanding the dynamics of human populations, including outcomes such as health, well-being, behavior, etc.