Social distance modulates recipient's fairness consideration in the dictator game: An ERP study

Wu, Yin; Leliveld, Marijke C.; Zhou, Xiaolin

doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2011.08.009

Cited by 128 publications

(156 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

122

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The topography and latency are similar to previous experiments in adults (Miltner, Braun, & Coles, 1997;Hajcak, Holroyd, Moser, & Simons, 2005;Hajcak, Moser, Holroyd, & Simons, 2007;Holroyd & Coles, 2002), with a more pronounced negative potential for unfair compared to fair proposals detected at frontal and fronto-central sites (Wu et al, 2011).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

“…Previous studies have shown that recipients generally reject half of unfair offers, operationally defined as having a division ratio such that they receive less than 20% of the total (Boksem & De Cremer, 2010;Camerer & Thaler, 1995;Güth et al, 1982). The rejection of unfair offers is accompanied by a neuroelectric marker known as medial frontal negativity (MFN), which is a negative electroencephalographic (EEG) potential occurring between 200 and 350 ms at frontal electrodes (Boksem & DeCremer, 2010;Campanhã, Minati, Fregni, & Boggio, 2011;Wu, Leliveld, & Zhou, 2011). The MFN is hypothesized to originate from the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the dopaminergic system (Gehring & Willoughby, 2002;Holroyd & Coles, 2002), and its amplitude is smaller in response to positive outcomes and expected rewards, and larger for undesirable outcomes (Holroyd, Krigolson, & Lee, 2011;Holroyd, Larsen, & Cohen, 2004;Holroyd, Pakzad-Vaezi, & Krigolson, 2008;Nieuwenhuis, Yeung, Holroyd, Schurger, & Cohen, 2004;Pfabigan, Alexopoulos, Bauer, & Sailer, 2011;Potts, Martin, Burton, & Montague, 2006).…”

Section: Please Scroll Down For Articlementioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Adult-like neuroelectrical response to inequity in children: Evidence from the ultimatum game

Rêgo

Campanhã

Kassab

et al. 2015

Social Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People react aversely when faced with unfair situations, a phenomenon that has been related to an electroencephalographic (EEG) potential known as medial frontal negativity (MFN). To our knowledge, the existence of the MFN in children has not yet been demonstrated. Here, we recorded EEG activity from 15 children playing the ultimatum game (UG) and who afterward performed a recognition task, in order to assess whether they could recognize the unfair and fair (familiar) proposers among unfamiliar faces. During the recognition task, we also acquired pupil dilation data to investigate subconscious recognition processes. A typical (adult-like) MFN component was detected in reaction to unfair proposals. We found a positive correlation between reaction time and empathy, as well as a negative correlation between reaction time and systematic reasoning scores. Finally, we detected a significant difference in pupil dilation in response to unfamiliar faces versus UG proposers. Our data provide the first evidence of MFN in children, which appears to index similar neurophysiological phenomena as in adults. Also, reaction time to fair proposals seems to be related to individual traits, as represented by empathy and systematizing. Our pupil dilation data provide evidence that automatic responses to faces did not index fairness, but familiarity. These findings have implications for our understanding of social development in typically developing children.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Section: Please Scroll Down For Articlementioning

confidence: 98%

Adult-like neuroelectrical response to inequity in children: Evidence from the ultimatum game

Rêgo

Campanhã

Kassab

et al. 2015

Social Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, a number of ERP studies have shown that N2 is elicited by observation of others in physical pain, independent of the task demands, suggesting that the N2 may index an early automatic component of sensitivity to pain (Chen, Yang, & Cheng, 2012; Cheng, Hung, & Decety, 2012; Decety, Yang, & Cheng, 2010; Fan & Han, 2008; Han, Fan, & Mao, 2008; Perry, Bentin, Bartal, Lamm, & Decety, 2010). This component is particularly interesting in the context of moral judgments because in ultimatum games, fair and unfair offers produce differential N2 amplitudes (Boksem & De Cremer, 2010), and this effect is influenced by the social relationships between the participants (Wu, Leliveld, & Zhou, 2011). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the context of emotionprocessing, LPP is sensitive to fine-grained aspects of stimuli, rather than a broad pleasantness dimension (Macnamara et al, 2009). Moreover, recent work has shown that such late positivities not only distinguish between prosocial and antisocial actions, but that they are also sensitive to personality differences (Chiu Loke et al, 2011) and social context (Wu et al, 2011). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatiotemporal neural dynamics of moral judgment: A high-density ERP study

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Morality is a pervasive aspect of human nature across all cultures, and neuroscience investigations are necessary for identifying what computational mechanisms underpin moral cognition. The current study used high-density ERPs to examine how moral evaluations are mediated by automatic and controlled processes as well as how quickly information and causal-intentional representations can be extracted when viewing morally laden behavior. The study also explored the extent to which individual dispositions in affective and cognitive empathy as well as justice sensitivity influence the encoding of moral valence when healthy participants make moral judgments about prosocial (interpersonal assistance) and antisocial (interpersonal harm) actions. Moral judgment differences were reflected in differential amplitudes for components associated with cognitive appraisal (LPP) as well as early components associated with emotional salience (N1 and N2). Moreover, source estimation was performed to indicate potential neural generators. A posterior-to-anterior shift was observed, with current density peaks first in right inferior parietal cortex (at the temporoparietal junction), then later in medial prefrontal cortex. Cognitive empathy scores predicted behavioral ratings of blame as well as differential amplitudes in LPP and component activity at posterior sites. Overall, this study offers important insights into the temporal unfolding of moral evaluations, including when in time individual differences in empathy influence neural encoding of moral valence.

show abstract

“…Behavior in UG reflects not only fairness preferences but also strategic decision-making between two parties (Rabin, 1993). Importantly, previous studies have shown that the relationship between the two parties affects behavior in UG (Eckel and Grossman, 2001; Yu et al, 2015) or similar games (Wu et al, 2011). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

When Do Low Status Individuals Accept Less? The Interaction between Self- and Other-Status during Resource Distribution

Blue

Dijk

et al. 2016

Front. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In real-world social interactions, social status influences responses to resource distribution. However, the way in which one’s own social status interacts with another’s status to influence responses to resource distribution is far from clear. In the current study, we dynamically manipulated participants’ social status and then asked participants to act as recipients in the ultimatum game (UG) along with proposers whose social status was made known to the participants. Experiment 1 used a between-participants design in which the participants were assigned as being of either high or low status according to their performance in a math competition (i.e., rank-inducing task). In Experiment 2, social status was manipulated within-subjects using the same rank-inducing task, with rounds of UG interleaved between rank-inducing sessions. Findings from the two experiments showed that both self-status and other-status influenced responses to UG offers, as participants were more likely to accept low offers from high status than low status proposers; this effect was particularly robust for low status participants when compared with high status participants. These findings suggest that, in comparison with individuals in high status, individuals in low status are more willing to accept low offers during resource distribution and are more affected by other-status considerations.

show abstract

Social distance modulates recipient's fairness consideration in the dictator game: An ERP study

Cited by 128 publications

References 68 publications

Adult-like neuroelectrical response to inequity in children: Evidence from the ultimatum game

Adult-like neuroelectrical response to inequity in children: Evidence from the ultimatum game

Spatiotemporal neural dynamics of moral judgment: A high-density ERP study

When Do Low Status Individuals Accept Less? The Interaction between Self- and Other-Status during Resource Distribution

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About