Cargando…

Differences in Social Decision-Making between Proposers and Responders during the Ultimatum Game: An EEG Study

The Ultimatum Game (UG) is a typical paradigm to investigate social decision-making. Although the behavior of humans in this task is already well established, the underlying brain processes remain poorly understood. Previous investigations using event-related potentials (ERPs) revealed three major c...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Horat, Sibylle K., Prévot, Anne, Richiardi, Jonas, Herrmann, François R., Favre, Grégoire, Merlo, Marco C. G., Missonnier, Pascal
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5504150/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28744204
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2017.00013
_version_ 1783249227146592256
author Horat, Sibylle K.
Prévot, Anne
Richiardi, Jonas
Herrmann, François R.
Favre, Grégoire
Merlo, Marco C. G.
Missonnier, Pascal
author_facet Horat, Sibylle K.
Prévot, Anne
Richiardi, Jonas
Herrmann, François R.
Favre, Grégoire
Merlo, Marco C. G.
Missonnier, Pascal
author_sort Horat, Sibylle K.
collection PubMed
description The Ultimatum Game (UG) is a typical paradigm to investigate social decision-making. Although the behavior of humans in this task is already well established, the underlying brain processes remain poorly understood. Previous investigations using event-related potentials (ERPs) revealed three major components related to cognitive processes in participants engaged in the responder condition, the early ERP component P2, the feedback-related negativity (FRN) and a late positive wave (late positive component, LPC). However, the comparison of the ERP waveforms between the responder and proposer conditions has never been studied. Therefore, to investigate condition-related electrophysiological changes, we applied the UG paradigm and compared parameters of the P2, LPC and FRN components in twenty healthy participants. For the responder condition, we found a significantly decreased amplitude and delayed latency for the P2 component, whereas the mean amplitudes of the LPC and FRN increased compared to the proposer condition. Additionally, the proposer condition elicited an early component consisting of a negative deflection around 190 ms, in the upward slope of the P2, probably as a result of early conflict-related processing. Using independent component analysis (ICA), we extracted one functional component time-locked to this deflection, and with source reconstruction (LAURA) we found the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) as one of the underlying sources. Overall, our findings indicate that intensity and time-course of neuronal systems engaged in the decision-making processes diverge between both UG conditions, suggesting differential cognitive processes. Understanding the electrophysiological bases of decision-making and social interactions in controls could be useful to further detect which steps are impaired in psychiatric patients in their ability to attribute mental states (such as beliefs, intents, or desires) to oneself and others. This ability is called mentalizing (also known as theory of mind).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5504150
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-55041502017-07-25 Differences in Social Decision-Making between Proposers and Responders during the Ultimatum Game: An EEG Study Horat, Sibylle K. Prévot, Anne Richiardi, Jonas Herrmann, François R. Favre, Grégoire Merlo, Marco C. G. Missonnier, Pascal Front Integr Neurosci Neuroscience The Ultimatum Game (UG) is a typical paradigm to investigate social decision-making. Although the behavior of humans in this task is already well established, the underlying brain processes remain poorly understood. Previous investigations using event-related potentials (ERPs) revealed three major components related to cognitive processes in participants engaged in the responder condition, the early ERP component P2, the feedback-related negativity (FRN) and a late positive wave (late positive component, LPC). However, the comparison of the ERP waveforms between the responder and proposer conditions has never been studied. Therefore, to investigate condition-related electrophysiological changes, we applied the UG paradigm and compared parameters of the P2, LPC and FRN components in twenty healthy participants. For the responder condition, we found a significantly decreased amplitude and delayed latency for the P2 component, whereas the mean amplitudes of the LPC and FRN increased compared to the proposer condition. Additionally, the proposer condition elicited an early component consisting of a negative deflection around 190 ms, in the upward slope of the P2, probably as a result of early conflict-related processing. Using independent component analysis (ICA), we extracted one functional component time-locked to this deflection, and with source reconstruction (LAURA) we found the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) as one of the underlying sources. Overall, our findings indicate that intensity and time-course of neuronal systems engaged in the decision-making processes diverge between both UG conditions, suggesting differential cognitive processes. Understanding the electrophysiological bases of decision-making and social interactions in controls could be useful to further detect which steps are impaired in psychiatric patients in their ability to attribute mental states (such as beliefs, intents, or desires) to oneself and others. This ability is called mentalizing (also known as theory of mind). Frontiers Media S.A. 2017-07-11 /pmc/articles/PMC5504150/ /pubmed/28744204 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2017.00013 Text en Copyright © 2017 Horat, Prévot, Richiardi, Herrmann, Favre, Merlo and Missonnier. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Horat, Sibylle K.
Prévot, Anne
Richiardi, Jonas
Herrmann, François R.
Favre, Grégoire
Merlo, Marco C. G.
Missonnier, Pascal
Differences in Social Decision-Making between Proposers and Responders during the Ultimatum Game: An EEG Study
title Differences in Social Decision-Making between Proposers and Responders during the Ultimatum Game: An EEG Study
title_full Differences in Social Decision-Making between Proposers and Responders during the Ultimatum Game: An EEG Study
title_fullStr Differences in Social Decision-Making between Proposers and Responders during the Ultimatum Game: An EEG Study
title_full_unstemmed Differences in Social Decision-Making between Proposers and Responders during the Ultimatum Game: An EEG Study
title_short Differences in Social Decision-Making between Proposers and Responders during the Ultimatum Game: An EEG Study
title_sort differences in social decision-making between proposers and responders during the ultimatum game: an eeg study
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5504150/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28744204
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2017.00013
work_keys_str_mv AT horatsibyllek differencesinsocialdecisionmakingbetweenproposersandrespondersduringtheultimatumgameaneegstudy
AT prevotanne differencesinsocialdecisionmakingbetweenproposersandrespondersduringtheultimatumgameaneegstudy
AT richiardijonas differencesinsocialdecisionmakingbetweenproposersandrespondersduringtheultimatumgameaneegstudy
AT herrmannfrancoisr differencesinsocialdecisionmakingbetweenproposersandrespondersduringtheultimatumgameaneegstudy
AT favregregoire differencesinsocialdecisionmakingbetweenproposersandrespondersduringtheultimatumgameaneegstudy
AT merlomarcocg differencesinsocialdecisionmakingbetweenproposersandrespondersduringtheultimatumgameaneegstudy
AT missonnierpascal differencesinsocialdecisionmakingbetweenproposersandrespondersduringtheultimatumgameaneegstudy