When "more for others, less for self" leads to co-benefits: A tri-MRI dyad-hyperscanning study.

Unselfishness is admired, especially when collaborations between groups of various scales are urgently needed. However, its neural mechanisms remain elusive. In a tri-MRI dyad-hyperscanning experiment involving 26 groups, each containing 4 participants as two rotating pairs in a coordination game, we sought to achieve reciprocity, or "winning in turn by the two interacting players," as the precursor to unselfishness. Due to its critical role in social processing, the right temporal-parietal junction (rTPJ) was the seed for both time domain (connectivity) and frequency domain (i.e., coherence) analyses. For the former, negative connectivity between the rTPJ and the mentalizing network areas (e.g., the right inferior parietal lobule, rIPL) was identified, and such connectivity was further negatively correlated with the individual's final gain, supporting our task design that "rewarded" the reciprocal participants. For the latter, cerebral coherences of the rTPJs emerged between the interacting pairs (i.e., within-group interacting pairs), and the coupling between the rTPJ and the right superior temporal gyrus (rSTG) between the players who were not interacting with each other (i.e., within-group noninteracting pairs). These coherences reinforce the hypotheses that the rTPJ-rTPJ coupling tracks the collaboration processes and the rTPJ-rSTG coupling for the emergence of decontextualized shared meaning. Our results underpin two social roles (inferring others' behavior and interpreting social outcomes) subserved by the rTPJ-related network and highlight its interaction with other-self/other-concerning brain areas in reaching co-benefits among unselfish players.

Is increased activation in the fusiform face area to Greebles a result of appropriate expertise training or caused by Greebles' face likeness?

Background: In 2011, Brants et al. trained eight individuals to become Greeble experts and found neuronal inversion effects [NIEs; i.e., higher fusiform face area (FFA) activity for upright, rather than inverted Greebles]. These effects were also found for faces, both before and after training. By claiming to have replicated the seminal Greeble training study by Gauthier and colleagues in 1999, Brants et al. interpreted these results as participants viewing Greebles as faces throughout training, contrary to the original argument of subjects becoming Greeble experts only after training. However, Brants et al.'s claim presents two issues. First, their behavioral training results did not replicate those of Gauthier and Tarr conducted in 1997 and 1998, raising concerns of whether the right training regime had been adopted. Second, both a literature review and meta-analysis of NIEs in the FFA suggest its impotency as an index of the face(-like) processing. Objectives: To empirically evaluate these issues, the present study compared two documented training paradigms Gauthier and colleagues in 1997 and 1998, and compared their impact on the brain. Methods: Sixteen NCKU undergraduate and graduate students (nine girls) were recruited. Sixty Greeble exemplars were categorized by two genders, five families, and six individual levels. The participants were randomly divided into two groups (one for Greeble classification at all three levels and the other for gender- and individual-level training). Several fMRI tasks were administered at various time points, specifically, before training (1st), during training (2nd), and typically no <24 h after reaching expertise criterion (3rd). Results: The ROI analysis results showed significant increases in the FFA for Greebles, and a clear neural "adaptation," both only in the Gauthier97 group and only after training, reflecting clear modulation of extensive experiences following an "appropriate" training regime. In both groups, no clear NIEs for faces nor Greebles were found, which was also in line with the review of extant studies bearing this comparison. Conclusion: Collectively, these results invalidate the assumptions behind Brants et al.'s findings.

Distinct cerebral coherence in task-based fMRI hyperscanning: cooperation versus competition.

This study features an functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) hyperscanning experiment from 2 sites, 305 km apart. The experiment contains 2 conditions: the dyad collaborated to win and then split the reward in the cooperation condition, whereas the winner took all the reward in the competition condition, thereby resulting in dynamic strategic interactions. To calculate the cerebral coherence in such jittered event-related fMRI tasks, we first iteratively estimated the feedback-related blood oxygenation level-dependent responses of each trial, using 8 finite impulse response functions (16 s) and then concatenated the beta volume series. With the right temporal-parietal junction (rTPJ) as the seed, the interpersonal connected brain areas were separately identified: the right superior temporal gyrus (rSTG) (cooperation) and the left precuneus (lPrecuneus) (competition), both peaking at the designated frequency bin (1/16 s = 0.0625 Hz), but not in permuted pairs. In addition, the extended coherence analyses on shorter and longer concatenated volumes verified that only in the optimal trial frequency did the rTPJ-rSTG and rTPJ-lPrecuneus couplings peak. In sum, our approach both showcases a flexible analysis method that widens the applicability of interpersonal coherence in the rapid event-related fMRI hyperscanning and reveals a context-based inter-brain coupling between interacting pairs during cooperation and during competition.