Rejecting unfairness enhances the implicit sense of agency in the human brain.

Sense of agency (SoA) describes the feeling of control over one's actions and their consequences. One proposed index of implicit SoA is temporal compression, which refers to the phenomenon that voluntary actions and their outcomes are perceived as closer in time than they actually are. The present study measured temporal compression in the social norm violation situation. In two experiments participants joined in an Ultimatum game (UG), in which they were presented with offers that varied in fairness and they could choose to accept or reject the offers by pressing buttons. A neutral sound would occur after their choices in the UG and the participants had to estimate the time interval between their button pressing and the occurrence of the sound, and EEG signals were recorded during the task. Experiment 1 demonstrated that rejecting unfair offers decreased the perceived interval between action and outcome compared to accepting fair offers, suggesting a higher level of SoA after rejecting unfair offers. Experiment 2 replicated these results and further revealed an attenuated N1 in response to the sound following rejections of unfairness. Taken together, these results highlight the importance of social norms in affecting people's behaviors and agency experiences.

EXPRESS: The impact of partially covered faces on trust attribution, sharing resources and perceived fairness of one's own choices in Ultimatum Game.

Covered faces has been linked with impaired emotion recognition, yet it is entirely unexplored how an occlusion due to face masks may affect individuals' behavior in economic decisions. Across two studies, we explored whether partially covered faces (due to mask wearing or a horizontal black bar), and emotion displayed by the Responder influence peoples' sharing behavior in the Ultimatum Game and perceived fairness of one's proposal.Study 1 showed participants were more willing to equally share their resources with a happy face (compared to a neutral one). In addition, they were more willing to make a fair proposal when the person displayed was not wearing a face mask. Our results also provide evidence that, when people had to judge how fair was their proposal, participants rated a fair proposal as fairer when when Responders showed happy faces without masks, while unfair proposals were rated as fairer with happy masked faces; similarly, angry faces led to fairer ratings for fair offers without masks and unfair offers with masks. Study 2 partially confirmed previous results, highlighting how a simple occlusion on the face does not have a direct effect on the proposal, but moderates the effect of the displayed emotions.These findings indicate that social interactions might be affected by face occlusion, especially when it is represented by a face mask. Indeed, people might judge the same behavior in different ways based on the fact that their counterpart has a partially covered face.

The promoting effect of the absence of second-party's punishment power on third-party punishment in maintaining social fairness norms: An EEG hyper-scanning study.

Third-party punishment (TPP) plays an irreplaceable role in maintaining social fairness. Punishment power is a significant area of study within economic games. However, the impact of whether or not the second-party possesses punishment power on TPP remains unexplored. The present study utilizes the high temporal resolution of EEG and time-frequency analysis, intra-barin functional connectivity analysis, inter-brain synchronization (IBS) analysis, and granger causality analysis(GCA) to comprehensively explore the neural mechanism of TPP from the perspective of third-party individual's decision-making and IBS in the real-time social interaction. Time-frequency results found that, the absence of the punishment power activated more theta-band and alpha-band power compare to when second-party has punishment power. When second-party has no punishment power, functional connection results observed stronger functional connectivity in theta band for medium unfair offers between rTPJ and PFC. Dual-brain analysis revealed that when the second-party has no punishment power, there is a significantly higher IBS in the alpha band between the frontal and frontal-central lobes of the second-party and the parietal and parietal occipital lobes of the third-party. GCA results further showed that the direction of IBS from third-party to second-party was significantly stronger than from second-party to third-party. This study demonstrates that the absence of the second-party's punishment power promote TPP, and similar cognitive process of thinking on how to maintain social fairness enhances IBS. The current study emphasizes the influence of punishment power on TPP, broadens the research perspective and contributes crucial insights into maintain social fairness.

Developmental patterns and computational mechanisms of school-aged children's fairness-related decision making under social comparison.

The developmental patterns and computational mechanisms underlying the impact of unfair offers and social comparisons on school-aged children's fairness-related decision making remain unclear. To address this, we recruited 190 children aged 8 to 12 years (52.1% female) in a multi-responder ultimatum game. Results revealed an age-related decline in children's tendency to reject unfair offers, partially mediated by emotions, alongside a slight increase in rejecting inferior social comparisons. Computational modeling identified two distinct motivations guiding children's rejection behavior: inequity aversion and inferior social comparison avoidance. Furthermore, there was significant variability in responses to superior social comparisons, with some children displaying aversion and others seeking. Our refined model enhances the explanatory power of inequity aversion theory in complex multi-player social scenarios, validating and refining existing theories. In addition, the exploration of superior social comparison tendencies reveals individual heterogeneity, enriching our understanding of children's social comparisons. These findings contribute to elucidating the developmental patterns and internal mechanisms of children's socialization processes, offering implications for promoting their social adaptation and mental health.

Are Deaf College Students More Sensitive to Unfair Information? Evidence from an ERP Study.

To better understand the individual differences in fairness, we used event-related potentials (ERPs) to explore the fairness characteristics of deaf college students through the ultimatum game task. Behaviorally, the significant main effect of the proposal type was found, which meant both deaf and hearing college students showed a lower acceptance rate for the more unfair proposal. Interestingly, we found a significant interaction between group and proposal type in the early stage (N1). Moreover, in the deaf college group, N1 (induced by moderately and very unfair proposals) was significantly larger than that of fair proposals. However, we found that deaf college students had smaller amplitudes on P2 and P3 than hearing college students. These results suggested that deaf college students might pursue more equity strongly so they are more sensitive to unfair information in the early stage. In a word, we should provide more fair allocations for deaf college students in our harmonious society.

The interplay between the proposer's role model and moral behavior modulates proposal processing in the Ultimatum Game: An ERP study.

Economic decision-making plays a paramount role in both individual and national interests. Individuals have fairness preferences in economic decision-making, but a proposer's moral-related information may affect fairness considerations. In prior ERP studies, researchers have suggested moral identity influences fairness preferences in the Ultimatum Game (UG), but there are discrepancies in the results. Furthermore, whether role models (individuals whom someone else looks to help decide suitable behaviors), who can modulate people's moral standards, can affect fairness concerns in UG is still understudied. To address the questions, we selected the moral-related statements by eliminating those with illegal information and employed the ERP technique to explore whether the interplay of the proposer's role model and moral-related behavior influenced fairness processing in the modified UG and the corresponding neural mechanisms. We mainly found that the aforementioned interaction effect on proposal considerations in UG could be mirrored in both rejection rates and P300 variations. The results demonstrate that the interaction between the proposer's role model and moral behavior can modulate fairness concerns in UG. Our current work provides new avenues for elucidating the time course of the influencing mechanism of fair distributions in complicated social environments.

Trait reward sensitivity modulates connectivity with the temporoparietal junction and Anterior Insula during strategic decision making.

Many decisions happen in social contexts such as negotiations, yet little is understood about how people balance fairness versus selfishness. Past investigations found that activation in brain areas involved in executive function and reward processing was associated with people offering less with no threat of rejection from their partner, compared to offering more when there was a threat of rejection. However, it remains unclear how trait reward sensitivity may modulate activation and connectivity patterns in these situations. To address this gap, we used task-based fMRI to examine the relation between reward sensitivity and the neural correlates of bargaining choices. Participants (N = 54) completed the Sensitivity to Punishment (SP)/Sensitivity to Reward (SR) Questionnaire and the Behavioral Inhibition System/Behavioral Activation System scales. Participants performed the Ultimatum and Dictator Games as proposers and exhibited strategic decisions by being fair when there was a threat of rejection, but being selfish when there was not a threat of rejection. We found that strategic decisions evoked activation in the Inferior Frontal Gyrus (IFG) and the Anterior Insula (AI). Next, we found elevated IFG connectivity with the Temporoparietal junction (TPJ) during strategic decisions. Finally, we explored whether trait reward sensitivity modulated brain responses while making strategic decisions. We found that people who scored lower in reward sensitivity made less strategic choices when they exhibited higher AI-Angular Gyrus connectivity. Taken together, our results demonstrate how trait reward sensitivity modulates neural responses to strategic decisions, potentially underscoring the importance of this factor within social and decision neuroscience.

The consequences of AI training on human decision-making.

AI is now an integral part of everyday decision-making, assisting us in both routine and high-stakes choices. These AI models often learn from human behavior, assuming this training data is unbiased. However, we report five studies that show that people change their behavior to instill desired routines into AI, indicating this assumption is invalid. To show this behavioral shift, we recruited participants to play the ultimatum game, where they were asked to decide whether to accept proposals of monetary splits made by either other human participants or AI. Some participants were informed their choices would be used to train an AI proposer, while others did not receive this information. Across five experiments, we found that people modified their behavior to train AI to make fair proposals, regardless of whether they could directly benefit from the AI training. After completing this task once, participants were invited to complete this task again but were told their responses would not be used for AI training. People who had previously trained AI persisted with this behavioral shift, indicating that the new behavioral routine had become habitual. This work demonstrates that using human behavior as training data has more consequences than previously thought since it can engender AI to perpetuate human biases and cause people to form habits that deviate from how they would normally act. Therefore, this work underscores a problem for AI algorithms that aim to learn unbiased representations of human preferences.

The Neurocomputational Mechanism Underlying Decision-Making on Unfairness to Self and Others.

Fairness is a fundamental value in human societies, with individuals concerned about unfairness both to themselves and to others. Nevertheless, an enduring debate focuses on whether self-unfairness and other-unfairness elicit shared or distinct neuropsychological processes. To address this, we combined a three-person ultimatum game with computational modeling and advanced neuroimaging analysis techniques to unravel the behavioral, cognitive, and neural patterns underlying unfairness to self and others. Our behavioral and computational results reveal a heightened concern among participants for self-unfairness over other-unfairness. Moreover, self-unfairness consistently activates brain regions such as the anterior insula, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, spanning various spatial scales that encompass univariate activation, local multivariate patterns, and whole-brain multivariate patterns. These regions are well-established in their association with emotional and cognitive processes relevant to fairness-based decision-making. Conversely, other-unfairness primarily engages the middle occipital gyrus. Collectively, our findings robustly support distinct neurocomputational signatures between self-unfairness and other-unfairness.

Reciprocity models revisited: intention factors and reference values.

We present a test of the two most established reciprocity models, an intention factor model and a reference value model. We test characteristic elements of each model in a series of twelve mini-ultimatum games. Results from online experiments show major differences between actual behavior and predictions of both models: the distance of actual offers to the proposed reference value provides a poor measure for the kindness of offers, while a comparison of offers with extreme offers as suggested by the intention factor model makes offers indiscriminable in richer settings. We discuss possible combinations of both models better describing our observations.

The impact of facial attractiveness and alleged personality traits on fairness decisions in the ultimatum game: Evidence from ERPs.

In the mind of the beholder the personality and facial attractiveness of others are interrelated. However, how these specific properties are processed in the neurocognitive system and interact with each other while economic decisions are made is not well understood. Here, we combined the ultimatum game with EEG technology, to investigate how alleged personality traits and the perceived facial attractiveness of proposers of fair and unfair offers influence their acceptance by the responders. As expected, acceptance rate was higher for fair than unfair allocations. Overall, responders were more likely to accept proposals from individuals with higher facial attractiveness and with more positive personality traits. In ERPs, words denoting negative personality traits elicited larger P2 components than positive trait words, and more attractive faces elicited larger LPC amplitudes. Replicating previous findings, FRN amplitudes were larger to unfair than to fair allocations. This effect was diminished if the proposer's faces were attractive or associated with positive personality traits. Hence, facial attractiveness and the valence of personality traits seem to be evaluated independently and at different time points. Subsequent decision making about unfair offers is similarly influenced by high attractiveness and positive personality of the proposer, diminishing the negative response normally elicited by "unfair" proposals, possibly due a "reward" effect. In the ERPs to the proposals the effect of positive personality and attractiveness were seen in the FRN and P300 components but for positive personality traits the effect even preceded the FRN effect. Altogether, the present results indicate that both high facial attractiveness and alleged positive personality mitigate the effects of unfair proposals, with temporally overlapping but independent neurocognitive correlates.

Proposer's moral identity modulates fairness processing in the ultimatum game: Evidence from behavior and brain potentials.

Economic decision-making is pivotal to both human private interests and the national economy. People pursue fairness in economic decision-making, but a proposer's moral identity can influence fairness processing. Previous ERP studies have revealed that moral identity has an effect on fairness considerations in the Ultimatum Game (UG), but the findings are inconsistent. To address the issue, we revised the moral-related sentences and used the ERP technique to measure the corresponding neural mechanism. We have observed that the fairness effect in UG can be mirrored in both MFN and P300 changes, whereas the moral identity effect on fairness in UG can be reflected by MFN but not P300 changes. These findings indicate that the moral identity of the proposer can modulate fairness processing in UG. The current study opens new avenues for clarifying the temporal course of the relationship between the proposer's moral identity and fairness in economic decision-making, which is beneficial for understanding the influencing mechanism of fairness processing and fair allocations in complex social contexts.

A premium for positive social interest and attractive voices in the acceptability of unfair offers? An ERP study.

Although the attractiveness of voices plays an important role in social interactions, it is unclear how voice attractiveness and social interest influence social decision-making. Here, we combined the ultimatum game with recording event-related brain potentials (ERPs) and examined the effect of attractive versus unattractive voices of the proposers, expressing positive versus negative social interest ("I like you" vs. "I don't like you"), on the acceptance of the proposal. Overall, fair offers were accepted at significantly higher rates than unfair offers, and high voice attractiveness increased acceptance rates for all proposals. In ERPs in response to the voices, their attractiveness and expressed social interests yielded early additive effects in the N1 component, followed by interactions in the subsequent P2, P3 and N400 components. More importantly, unfair offers elicited a larger Medial Frontal Negativity (MFN) than fair offers but only when the proposer's voice was unattractive or when the voice carried positive social interest. These results suggest that both voice attractiveness and social interest moderate social decision-making and there is a similar "beauty premium" for voices as for faces.

Impact of the gut microbiome composition on social decision-making.

There is increasing evidence for the role of the gut microbiome in the regulation of socio-affective behavior in animals and clinical conditions. However, whether and how the composition of the gut microbiome may influence social decision-making in health remains unknown. Here, we tested the causal effects of a 7-week synbiotic (vs. placebo) dietary intervention on altruistic social punishment behavior in an ultimatum game. Results showed that the intervention increased participants' willingness to forgo a monetary payoff when treated unfairly. This change in social decision-making was related to changes in fasting-state serum levels of the dopamine-precursor tyrosine proposing a potential mechanistic link along the gut-microbiota-brain-behavior axis. These results improve our understanding of the bidirectional role body-brain interactions play in social decision-making and why humans at times act "irrationally" according to standard economic theory.

The involvement of rTPJ in intention attribution during social decision making: A TMS study.

The mini-Ultimatum Game (mini-UG) is a bargaining game used to assess the reactions of a responder to unfair offers made by a proposer under different intentionality conditions. Previous studies employing this task showed the activation of responders' right temporoparietal junction (rTPJ), which could be related to its involvement in judgments of intentionality. To verify this hypothesis, in the present study we applied online transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the rTPJ in responders during the mini-UG, in which we manipulated intention attribution implicitly. A cover story was employed to induce participants to believe they were interacting with another agent. We expected that interfering with the rTPJ could affect the ability of responders to assume proposers' perspective, producing higher rates of rejections of unfair offers when offers are perceived as independent from responders' intentionality to inequality. Twenty-six healthy women voluntarily participated in the study. In the mini-UG, an unfair distribution of the proposer (8/2 offer) was pitted against one of three alternative offers: fair-alternative (5/5), no-alternative (8/2), hyperfair-alternative (2/8). During the task, a train of TMS pulses was delivered at proposers' offer presentation in blocks of active (rTPJ) or control (Vertex) stimulation according to an ABAB design. As expected, findings showed that rejection of the no-alternative offers was higher under TMS stimulation of the rTPJ compared with the control TMS. This effect was modulated by the degree of trustworthiness in the cover story. These data contribute defining the mechanisms and brain areas underpinning social decision making as assessed by bargaining tasks.

On Playing with Emotion: A Spatial Evolutionary Variation of the Ultimatum Game.

The Ultimatum Game is a simplistic representation of bargaining processes occurring in social networks. In the standard version of this game, the first player, called the proposer, makes an offer on how to split a certain amount of money. If the second player, called the responder, accepts the offer, the money is divided according to the proposal; if the responder declines the offer, both players receive no money. In this article, an agent-based model is employed to evaluate the performance of five distinct strategies of playing a modified version of this game. A strategy corresponds to instructions on how a player must act as the proposer and as the responder. Here, the strategies are inspired by the following basic emotions: anger, fear, joy, sadness, and surprise. Thus, in the game, each interacting agent is a player endowed with one of these five basic emotions. In the modified version explored in this article, the spatial dimension is taken into account and the survival of the players depends on successful negotiations. Numerical simulations are performed in order to determine which basic emotion dominates the population in terms of prevalence and accumulated money. Information entropy is also computed to assess the time evolution of population diversity and money distribution. From the obtained results, a conjecture on the emergence of the sense of fairness is formulated.

The neurocomputational signature of decision-making for unfair offers in females under acute psychological stress.

Stress is a crucial factor affecting social decision-making. However, its impacts on the behavioral and neural processes of females' unfairness decision-making remain unclear. Combining computational modeling and functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), this study attempted to illuminate the neurocomputational signature of unfairness decision-making in females. We also considered the effect of trait stress coping styles. Forty-four healthy young females (20.98 ± 2.89 years) were randomly assigned to the stress group (n = 21) and the control group (n = 23). Acute psychosocial stress was induced by the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST), and participants then completed the one-shot ultimatum game (UG) as responders. The results showed that acute psychosocial stress reduced the adaptability to fairness and lead to more random decision-making responses. Moreover, in the stress group, a high level of negative coping style predicted more deterministic decision. fNIRS results showed that stress led to an increase of oxy-hemoglobin (HbO) peak in the right temporoparietal junction (rTPJ), while decreased the activation of left middle temporal gyrus (lMTG) when presented the moderately unfair (MU) offers. This signified more involvement of the mentalization and the inhibition of moral processing. Moreover, individuals with higher negative coping scores showed more deterministic decision behaviors under stress. Taken together, our study emphasizes the role of acute psychosocial stress in affecting females' unfairness decision-making mechanisms in social interactions, and provides evidences for the "tend and befriend" pattern based on a cognitive neuroscience perspec.

Highly logical and non-emotional decisions in both risky and social contexts: understanding decision making in autism spectrum disorder through computational modeling.

In risky contexts, autism spectrum disorder (ASD) individuals exhibit more logical consistency and non-emotional decisions than do typical adults (TAs). This way of deciding could be also prevailing in social contexts, leading to maladaptive decisions. This evidence is scarce and inconsistent, and further research is needed. Recent developments in computational modeling allow analysis of decisional subcomponents that could provide valuable information to understand the decision-making and help address inconsistencies. Twenty-seven individuals with ASD and 25 TAs were submitted to a framing-task and the ultimatum game (UG). The Rescorla-Wagner computational model was used to analyze UG decisions. Results showed that in the UG, the ASD group exhibited a higher utilitarianism, characterized by lower aversion to unfairness and higher acceptance of offers. Moreover, this way of deciding was predicted by the higher economic rationality found in the framing task, where people with ASD did not manifest emotional biases such as framing effect. These results could suggest an atypical decision making, highly logical and non-emotional, as a robust feature of ASD.

Individualistic attitudes in Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma undermine evolutionary fitness and may drive cooperative human players to extinction.

Inarguably, humans perform the richest plethora of prosocial behaviours in the animal kingdom, and these are important for understanding how humans navigate their social environment. The success and failure of strategies human players devise also have implications for determining long-term socio-economic/evolutionary fitness. Following the footsteps of Press and Dyson (2012), I implemented their evolutionary game-theoretic modelling from Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma (a behavioural economic probe of interpersonal cooperation) and re-analysed already published data on human proposer behaviour in the Ultimatum Game (a behavioural economic probe of altruistic punishment) involving 50 human participants versus stochastic computerized opponents with prosocial and individualistic social value orientations. Although the results indicate that it is more likely to break cycles of mutual defection in ecosystems in which humans interact with individualistic opponents, analysis of social-economic fitness at the Markov stationary states suggested that this comes at an evolutionary cost. Overall, human players acted in a significantly more cooperative manner than their opponents, but they failed to overcome extortion from individualistic agents, risking 'extinction' in 70% of the cases. These findings demonstrate human players might be short-sighted, and social interactive decision strategies they devise while adjusting to different types of opponents may not be optimal in the long run.

Chimpanzees engage in competitive altruism in a triadic ultimatum game.

Partner choice promotes competition among individuals to be selected as a cooperative partner, a phenomenon referred to as competitive altruism. We explored whether chimpanzees engage in competitive altruism in a triadic Ultimatum Game where two proposers can send offers simultaneously or consecutively to a responder who can only accept one of the two competing offers. In a dyadic control condition only one proposer at a time could send an offer to the responder. Chimpanzees increased their offers across trials in the competitive triadic, but not in the dyadic control condition. Chimpanzees also increased their offers after being rejected in previous triadic trials. Furthermore, we found that chimpanzees, under specific conditions, outcompete first proposers in triadic consecutive trials before the responder could choose which offer to accept by offering more than what is expected if they acted randomly or simply offered the smallest possible amount. These results suggest that competitive altruism in chimpanzees did not emerge just as a by-product of them trying to increase over previous losses. Chimpanzees might consider how others' interactions affect their outcomes and engage in strategies to maximize their chances of being selected as cooperative partners.