RESUMO
Trust and distrust are constructs that have provoked and undergone lots of discussion in the fields of sociology and psychology. However, to our knowledge, there is little agreement about how these constructs should be treated in the future. The present study tries to help in this discussion by re-analyzing prior neurophysiological data highlighting differences between trust and distrust by connecting these data with two distinct personality dimensions. Thus, the objective was to analyze the connection between neurophysiological trust/distrust processing and distinct HEXACO personality dimensions. Differences were found in the event-related potentials (ERPs) calculated for visual presentations of political institution words and brand names, which were evaluated with respect to trust and distrust by button presses. Two time points (330 ms and 780 ms) showed brain activity differences between trust and distrust related to the two word categories at frontal electrode locations. For this study, these findings were taken and connected to HEXACO-60 personality inventory results collected from prior participants. Statistical analysis revealed a significant interaction between the ERPs and two HEXACO personality dimensions concerning trusted brands at the later time point (780 ms) at the right frontal electrode location F8. This result is taken as neurophysiological evidence that parameter values of the personality traits honesty-humility and agreeableness have an influence on brain functions related to trusted brands.
RESUMO
Especially for young people, influencers and other celebrities followed on social media evoke affective closeness that in their young minds seems real even though it is fake. Such fake friendships are potentially problematic because of their felt reality on the consumer side while lacking any inversely felt true closeness. The question arises if the unilateral friendship of a social media user is equal or at least similar to real reciprocal friendship. Instead of asking social media users for explicit responses (conscious deliberation), the present exploratory study aimed to answer this question with the help of brain imaging technology. Thirty young participants were first invited to provide individual lists including (i) twenty names of their most followed and loved influencers or other celebrities (fake friend names), (ii) twenty names of loved real friends and relatives (real friend names) as well as (iii) twenty names they do not feel any closeness to (no friend names). They then came to the Freud CanBeLab (Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience and Behavior Lab) where they were shown their selected names in a random sequence (two rounds), while their brain activities were recorded via electroencephalography (EEG) and later calculated into event-related potentials (ERPs). We found short (ca. 100 ms) left frontal brain activity starting at around 250 ms post-stimulus to process real friend and no friend names similarly, while both ERPs differed from those elicited by fake friend names. This is followed by a longer effect (ca. 400 ms), where left and right frontal and temporoparietal ERPs also differed between fake and real friend names, but at this later processing stage, no friend names elicited similar brain activities to fake friend names in those regions. In general, real friend names elicited the most negative going brain potentials (interpreted as highest brain activation levels). These exploratory findings represent objective empirical evidence that the human brain clearly distinguishes between influencers or other celebrities and close people out of real life even though subjective feelings of closeness and trust can be similar. In summary, brain imaging shows there is nothing like a real friend. The findings of this study might be seen as a starting point for future studies using ERPs to investigate social media impact and topics such as fake friendship.
