Distinguishing neural correlates of context-dependent advantageous- and disadvantageous-inequity aversion

Significance Despite extensive research on disadvantageous inequity, little is known about advantageous inequity and whether these two types of inequity involve differential neurocognitive mechanisms. We address these questions from the perspective of context dependency and suggest that these two types of inequity are associated with differential neurocognitive substrates, subserved by different brain regions and in particular by the spatial gradient in insular activity. Our findings shed light on how social contexts (i.e., interpersonal guilt) are integrated into social decision making and suggest that the resistance to unequal situations when individuals are in disadvantageous status may primarily stem from their emotional responses, whereas the resistance to unequal situations when individuals are in advantageous status may involve advanced cognitive functions such as mentalizing. Humans can integrate social contextual information into decision-making processes to adjust their responses toward inequity. This context dependency emerges when individuals receive more (i.e., advantageous inequity) or less (i.e., disadvantageous inequity) than others. However, it is not clear whether context-dependent processing of advantageous and disadvantageous inequity involves differential neurocognitive mechanisms. Here, we used fMRI to address this question by combining an interactive game that modulates social contexts (e.g., interpersonal guilt) with computational models that enable us to characterize individual weights on inequity aversion. In each round, the participant played a dot estimation task with an anonymous coplayer. The coplayer would receive pain stimulation with 50% probability when either of them responded incorrectly. At the end of each round, the participant completed a variant of dictator game, which determined payoffs for him/herself and the coplayer. Computational modeling demonstrated the context dependency of inequity aversion: when causing pain to the coplayer (i.e., guilt context), participants cared more about the advantageous inequity and became more tolerant of the disadvantageous inequity, compared with other conditions. Consistently, neuroimaging results suggested the two types of inequity were associated with differential neurocognitive substrates. While the context-dependent processing of advantageous inequity was associated with social- and mentalizing-related processes, involving left anterior insula, right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, and dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, the context-dependent processing of disadvantageous inequity was primarily associated with emotion- and conflict-related processes, involving left posterior insula, right amygdala, and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex. These results extend our understanding of decision-making processes related to inequity aversion.

[1]  Hongbo Yu,et al.  Neural Substrates of Intention–Consequence Integration and Its Impact on Reactive Punishment in Interpersonal Transgression , 2015, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[2]  Martin P. Paulus,et al.  Time and decision making: differential contribution of the posterior insular cortex and the striatum during a delay discounting task , 2007, Experimental Brain Research.

[3]  Kenneth F. Scheve,et al.  Inequality and redistribution behavior in a give-or-take game , 2018, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[4]  L. I. Reed The Effect of Guilt on Altruism in the One-Shot Anonymous Prisoner's Dilemma Game , 2010 .

[5]  M. Marthinsen Inequality, redistribution and growth - interrelations and directions , 2016 .

[6]  D. Owens Rationalism About Obligation , 2008 .

[7]  E. Fehr,et al.  Changing Social Norm Compliance with Noninvasive Brain Stimulation , 2013, Science.

[8]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Psychophysiological and Modulatory Interactions in Neuroimaging , 1997, NeuroImage.

[9]  Yue-Jia Luo,et al.  Neural signatures of fairness‐related normative decision making in the ultimatum game: A coordinate‐based meta‐analysis , 2015, Human brain mapping.

[10]  Adrianna C. Jenkins,et al.  Damage To Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex Affects Tradeoffs Between Honesty And Self-Interest , 2014, Nature Neuroscience.

[11]  Daniel S. Margulies,et al.  Functional connectivity of the human amygdala using resting state fMRI , 2009, NeuroImage.

[12]  Alexander Borst,et al.  How does Nature Program Neuron Types? , 2008, Front. Neurosci..

[13]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Analysis of family‐wise error rates in statistical parametric mapping using random field theory , 2016, Human brain mapping.

[14]  L. Thompson,et al.  Social Utility and Decision Making in Interpersonal Contexts , 1989 .

[15]  C. Sripada,et al.  Altered resting-state amygdala functional connectivity in men with posttraumatic stress disorder. , 2012, Journal of psychiatry & neuroscience : JPN.

[16]  Eveline A. Crone,et al.  Neural Correlates of Advantageous and Disadvantageous Inequity in Sharing Decisions , 2014, PloS one.

[17]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  The Neural Basis of Economic Decision-Making in the Ultimatum Game , 2003, Science.

[18]  Colin Camerer,et al.  Economic Games Quantify Diminished Sense of Guilt in Patients with Damage to the Prefrontal Cortex , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[19]  Matthias Gamer,et al.  Are irrational reactions to unfairness truly emotionally-driven? Dissociated behavioural and emotional responses in the Ultimatum Game task , 2010, Cognition.

[20]  E. Fehr,et al.  The neurobiology of rewards and values in social decision making , 2014, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[21]  A. Mokros,et al.  Emotional empathy and psychopathy in offenders: an experimental study. , 2013, Journal of personality disorders.

[22]  Mkael Symmonds,et al.  Neural Segregation of Objective and Contextual Aspects of Fairness , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[23]  S. Sternberg,et al.  Separate modifiability, mental modules, and the use of pure and composite measures to reveal them. , 2001, Acta psychologica.

[24]  Michael D. Basil,et al.  Guilt and giving: A process model of empathy and efficacy , 2008 .

[25]  L. Pessoa,et al.  Emotion processing and the amygdala: from a 'low road' to 'many roads' of evaluating biological significance , 2010, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[26]  Luke J. Chang,et al.  Triangulating the Neural, Psychological, and Economic Bases of Guilt Aversion , 2011, Neuron.

[27]  Daniel C. McNamee,et al.  Category-dependent and category-independent goal-value codes in human ventromedial prefrontal cortex , 2013, Nature Neuroscience.

[28]  E. Kubany,et al.  GUILT: ELABORATION OF A MULTIDIMENSIONAL MODEL , 2003 .

[29]  Ming Hsu,et al.  Dopamine Modulates Egalitarian Behavior in Humans , 2015, Current Biology.

[30]  J. O'Doherty,et al.  Model‐Based fMRI and Its Application to Reward Learning and Decision Making , 2007, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[31]  Dino J. Levy,et al.  The root of all value: a neural common currency for choice , 2012, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[32]  Pedro Rey-Biel,et al.  Inequity Aversion and Team Incentives , 2002 .

[33]  F. D. de Waal,et al.  Evolution of responses to (un)fairness , 2014, Science.

[34]  Nikolaus Kriegeskorte,et al.  Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience Systems Neuroscience , 2022 .

[35]  S. Eickhoff,et al.  Social comparison in the brain: A coordinate‐based meta‐analysis of functional brain imaging studies on the downward and upward comparisons , 2018, Human brain mapping.

[36]  C. Ruff,et al.  Neurocomputational approaches to social behavior. , 2018, Current opinion in psychology.

[37]  Gregory S. Berns,et al.  Neural mechanisms of the influence of popularity on adolescent ratings of music , 2010, NeuroImage.

[38]  G. Fernández,et al.  Reinforcement Learning Signal Predicts Social Conformity , 2009, Neuron.

[39]  Ethan Kross,et al.  Discriminating Neural Representations of Physical and Social Pains: How Multivariate Statistics Challenge the 'shared Representation' Theory of Pain Rogachov a Hanna Jr, and Wager Td. Separate Neural Representations for Physical Pain and Social Rejection , 2022 .

[40]  Klaus M. Schmidt,et al.  A Theory of Fairness, Competition, and Cooperation , 1999 .

[41]  Masaki Isoda,et al.  What makes the dorsomedial frontal cortex active during reading the mental states of others? , 2013, Front. Neurosci..

[42]  E. Crone,et al.  The link between cognitive control and decision-making across child and adolescent development , 2016, Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences.

[43]  Samuel M. McClure,et al.  Anchors, scales and the relative coding of value in the brain , 2008, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[44]  Hongbo Yu,et al.  The voice of conscience: neural bases of interpersonal guilt and compensation. , 2014, Social cognitive and affective neuroscience.

[45]  Serge A R B Rombouts,et al.  Unfair? It depends: neural correlates of fairness in social context. , 2010, Social cognitive and affective neuroscience.

[46]  Á. Pascual-Leone,et al.  Diminishing Reciprocal Fairness by Disrupting the Right Prefrontal Cortex , 2006, Science.

[47]  E. Miller,et al.  An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. , 2001, Annual review of neuroscience.

[48]  Russell A. Poldrack,et al.  Large-scale automated synthesis of human functional neuroimaging data , 2011, Nature Methods.

[49]  J. Tangney,et al.  Moral emotions and moral behavior. , 2007, Annual review of psychology.

[50]  Alan G. Sanfey,et al.  Affective state and decision-making in the Ultimatum Game , 2006, Experimental Brain Research.

[51]  A. Craig,et al.  How do you feel — now? The anterior insula and human awareness , 2009, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[52]  Joaquim Radua,et al.  Game and the brain : A meta-analysis f neuroimaging studies , 2014 .

[53]  S. Quartz,et al.  The Right and the Good: Distributive Justice and Neural Encoding of Equity and Efficiency , 2008, Science.

[54]  M. Crockett How Formal Models Can Illuminate Mechanisms of Moral Judgment and Decision Making , 2016 .

[55]  Hans Knutsson,et al.  Cluster failure: Why fMRI inferences for spatial extent have inflated false-positive rates , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[56]  W. Newsome,et al.  Choosing the greater of two goods: neural currencies for valuation and decision making , 2005, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[57]  A. Tversky,et al.  Context-dependent preferences , 1993 .

[58]  J. Decety,et al.  The Emerging Social Neuroscience of Justice Motivation , 2017, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[59]  R. Baumeister,et al.  Guilt: an interpersonal approach. , 1994, Psychological bulletin.

[60]  A. McDonald Cortical pathways to the mammalian amygdala , 1998, Progress in Neurobiology.

[61]  Jamie Ward,et al.  The neuropsychological impact of insular cortex lesions , 2010, Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry.

[62]  Colin Camerer,et al.  Neural evidence for inequality-averse social preferences , 2010, Nature.

[63]  G. Rees,et al.  Neuroimaging: Decoding mental states from brain activity in humans , 2006, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[64]  Luke J. Chang,et al.  Great expectations: neural computations underlying the use of social norms in decision-making. , 2011, Social cognitive and affective neuroscience.

[65]  J. Rilling,et al.  The neuroscience of social decision-making. , 2011, Annual review of psychology.

[66]  Jan Fekke Ybema,et al.  On preferences and doing the right thing: Satisfaction with advantageous inequity when cognitive processing is limited , 2006 .

[67]  Saori C. Tanaka,et al.  Prediction of immediate and future rewards differentially recruits cortico-basal ganglia loops , 2004, Nature Neuroscience.

[68]  D. Mobbs,et al.  Overlapping and distinct representations of advantageous and disadvantageous inequality , 2013, Human brain mapping.

[69]  Gereon R Fink,et al.  Disentangling self- and fairness-related neural mechanisms involved in the ultimatum game: an fMRI study. , 2013, Social cognitive and affective neuroscience.

[70]  A. Craig Significance of the insula for the evolution of human awareness of feelings from the body. , 2011, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[71]  N. Tzourio-Mazoyer,et al.  Automated Anatomical Labeling of Activations in SPM Using a Macroscopic Anatomical Parcellation of the MNI MRI Single-Subject Brain , 2002, NeuroImage.

[72]  A T Panter,et al.  Introducing the GASP scale: a new measure of guilt and shame proneness. , 2011, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[73]  K. Louie,et al.  The Neurobiology of Context-Dependent Valuation and Choice , 2014 .

[74]  Luke J. Chang,et al.  Decoding the role of the insula in human cognition: functional parcellation and large-scale reverse inference. , 2013, Cerebral cortex.

[75]  Ryuta Aoki,et al.  The neural bases for valuing social equality , 2015, Neuroscience Research.

[76]  F. Warneken,et al.  The developmental foundations of human fairness , 2017, Nature Human Behaviour.

[77]  Aldo Rustichini,et al.  Equality versus self-interest in the brain: Differential roles of anterior insula and medial prefrontal cortex , 2012, NeuroImage.

[78]  Peter Dayan,et al.  Necessary, Yet Dissociable Contributions of the Insular and Ventromedial Prefrontal Cortices to Norm Adaptation: Computational and Lesion Evidence in Humans , 2015, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[79]  Yuan Zhou,et al.  Game Theory Paradigm: A New Tool for Investigating Social Dysfunction in Major Depressive Disorders , 2015, Front. Psychiatry.

[80]  J. Hohwy,et al.  Context sensitivity in action decreases along the autism spectrum: a predictive processing perspective , 2015, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[81]  Benjamin Y Hayden,et al.  Dorsal Anterior Cingulate Cortex: A Bottom-Up View. , 2016, Annual review of neuroscience.

[82]  V. Menon,et al.  Saliency, switching, attention and control: a network model of insula function , 2010, Brain Structure and Function.

[83]  T. Lohrenz,et al.  Computational Substrates of Norms and Their Violations during Social Exchange , 2013, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[84]  C. Frith,et al.  Development and neurophysiology of mentalizing. , 2003, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[85]  Gut feelings and the reaction to perceived inequity: The interplay between bodily responses, regulation, and perception shapes the rejection of unfair offers on the ultimatum game , 2012, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.