The neural circuitry of emotion-induced distortions of trust

Abstract

Aversive emotions are likely to be a key source of irrational human decision-making but still little is known about the neural circuitry underlying emotion-cognition interactions during social behavior. Here, we show that incidental aversive emotions distort trust decisions and cause significant changes in the associated neural circuitry. Experimentally-induced negative affect reduced trust, suppressed trust-specific activity in left temporoparietal junction (TPJ), and reduced functional connectivity between TPJ and emotion-related regions such as the amygdala. The posterior superior temporal sulcus (pSTS) seems to play a key role in mediating the impact of emotion on behavior: Functional connectivity of this brain area with left TPJ was associated with trust in the absence of negative emotions, but aversive emotions disrupted this association between TPJ-pSTS connectivity and behavioral trust. Our findings may be useful for a better understanding of the neural circuitry of affective distortions and may help identify the neural bases of psychiatric diseases that are associated with emotion-related psychological and behavioral dysfunctions.

Connectome‐based model predicts individual differences in propensity to trust

“…Moreover, TPJ activity increases with age for trusting others—demonstrating a higher sensitivity toward other people's social signals (Fett, Gromann, Giampietro, Shergill, & Krabbendam, ). Finally, recent task‐based fMRI evidence has shown that the left TPJ is functionally connected with the amygdala and IFG—similar nodes that were also identified in the current study—to mediate human trust behaviors in a context‐dependent manner (Engelmann et al, ). Notably, both the task‐based approach implemented in Engelmann et al ()'s study and current RSFC approach identified the association of left TPJ (but not right TPJ) connectivity profiles with trust behaviors.…”

“…The TP is linked with the representation of abstract social knowledge about other people, such as whether they are trustworthy, that is important for our ability to mentalize (Frith & Frith, ; Saxe & Kanwisher, ; Zahn et al, ). The TPJ is well linked with social cognitive functions, including self‐other distinction, perspective‐taking, and intentional inferences of others (Van Overwalle, ), making it an essential region for inferring and attributing the intentions of others to evaluate relationship‐based trustworthiness (Engelmann, Meyer, Ruff, & Fehr, ). Trustors with higher perspective‐taking tendencies demonstrate greater trust toward others and decrease their trust more drastically after being betrayed (Fett et al, ).…”

Neurocognitive Adaptation and Mental Health Vulnerability Following Maltreatment: The Role of Social Functioning

“…For example, incidental aversive threats operating in the background of a social exchange paradigm (i.e. threats that are unrelated to the incentive structure of the interaction) have been shown to lead to the suppression of neural activity in the dlPFC and a reduced likelihood of cooperation (Engelmann et al, 2018).…”

Brain measurement and manipulation methods

“…This does not, however, stand in the way of implementing social games in an imaging context (Sanfey et al 2003;Baumgartner et al 2008). While early studies have made use of deception to implement social games in fMRI, the use of pre-recorded (strategy) decisions from earlier experiments that participants are matched with on every trial does not deem deception necessary (Engelmann et al 2017). Moreover, recent experiments in social neuroscience that investigated the neural correlates of empathy have created sophisticated experimental designs in which interaction partners stay with the subject inside the scanner room during an experimental run (Hein et al 2010;Hein et al 2015).…”

“…view visual stimuli projected onto a screen, while an MR-compatible response box is placed in the subject's hand to allow the subject to communicate her decisions. It is also possible to deliver other types of stimuli, including drinks(McClure et al 2007;Plassmann et al 2008), smells(Sommer et al 2012) and electrical shocksEngelmann et al 2017), and thereby mimic real-life decisions and create emotional contexts. It is good practice to reduce the duration of a scanning session to about one hour, since longer periods of time could result in discomfort…”