Cargando…

Higher Status Honesty Is Worth More: The Effect of Social Status on Honesty Evaluation

Promises are crucial for maintaining trust in social hierarchies. It is well known that not all promises are kept; yet the effect of social status on responses to promises being kept or broken is far from understood, as are the neural processes underlying this effect. Here we manipulated participant...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Blue, Philip R., Hu, Jie, Zhou, Xiaolin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5869916/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29615948
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00350
_version_ 1783309367808884736
author Blue, Philip R.
Hu, Jie
Zhou, Xiaolin
author_facet Blue, Philip R.
Hu, Jie
Zhou, Xiaolin
author_sort Blue, Philip R.
collection PubMed
description Promises are crucial for maintaining trust in social hierarchies. It is well known that not all promises are kept; yet the effect of social status on responses to promises being kept or broken is far from understood, as are the neural processes underlying this effect. Here we manipulated participants’ social status before measuring their investment behavior as Investor in iterated Trust Game (TG). Participants decided how much to invest in their partners, who acted as Trustees in TG, after being informed that their partners of higher or lower social status either promised to return half of the multiplied sum (4 × invested amount), did not promise, or had no opportunity to promise. Event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded when the participants saw the Trustees’ decisions in which the partners always returned half of the time, regardless of the experimental conditions. Trustee decisions to return or not after promising to do so were defined as honesty and dishonesty, respectively. Behaviorally, participants invested more when Trustees promised than when Trustees had no opportunity to promise, and this effect was greater for higher status than lower status Trustees. Neurally, when viewing Trustees’ return decisions, participants’ medial frontal negativity (MFN) responses (250–310 ms post onset) were more negative when Trustees did not return than when they did return, suggesting that not returning was an expectancy violation. P300 responses were only sensitive to higher status return feedback, and were more positive-going for higher status partner returns than for lower status partner returns, suggesting that higher status returns may have been more rewarding/motivationally significant. Importantly, only participants in low subjective socioeconomic status (SES) evidenced an increased P300 effect for higher status than lower status honesty (honesty – dishonesty), suggesting that higher status honesty was especially rewarding/motivationally significant for participants with low SES. Taken together, our results suggest that in an earlier time window, MFN encodes return valence, regardless of honesty or social status, which are addressed in a later cognitive appraisal process (P300). Our findings suggest that social status influences honesty perception at both a behavioral and neural level, and that subjective SES may modulate this effect.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5869916
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58699162018-04-03 Higher Status Honesty Is Worth More: The Effect of Social Status on Honesty Evaluation Blue, Philip R. Hu, Jie Zhou, Xiaolin Front Psychol Psychology Promises are crucial for maintaining trust in social hierarchies. It is well known that not all promises are kept; yet the effect of social status on responses to promises being kept or broken is far from understood, as are the neural processes underlying this effect. Here we manipulated participants’ social status before measuring their investment behavior as Investor in iterated Trust Game (TG). Participants decided how much to invest in their partners, who acted as Trustees in TG, after being informed that their partners of higher or lower social status either promised to return half of the multiplied sum (4 × invested amount), did not promise, or had no opportunity to promise. Event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded when the participants saw the Trustees’ decisions in which the partners always returned half of the time, regardless of the experimental conditions. Trustee decisions to return or not after promising to do so were defined as honesty and dishonesty, respectively. Behaviorally, participants invested more when Trustees promised than when Trustees had no opportunity to promise, and this effect was greater for higher status than lower status Trustees. Neurally, when viewing Trustees’ return decisions, participants’ medial frontal negativity (MFN) responses (250–310 ms post onset) were more negative when Trustees did not return than when they did return, suggesting that not returning was an expectancy violation. P300 responses were only sensitive to higher status return feedback, and were more positive-going for higher status partner returns than for lower status partner returns, suggesting that higher status returns may have been more rewarding/motivationally significant. Importantly, only participants in low subjective socioeconomic status (SES) evidenced an increased P300 effect for higher status than lower status honesty (honesty – dishonesty), suggesting that higher status honesty was especially rewarding/motivationally significant for participants with low SES. Taken together, our results suggest that in an earlier time window, MFN encodes return valence, regardless of honesty or social status, which are addressed in a later cognitive appraisal process (P300). Our findings suggest that social status influences honesty perception at both a behavioral and neural level, and that subjective SES may modulate this effect. Frontiers Media S.A. 2018-03-20 /pmc/articles/PMC5869916/ /pubmed/29615948 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00350 Text en Copyright © 2018 Blue, Hu and Zhou. 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) and the copyright owner 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 Psychology
Blue, Philip R.
Hu, Jie
Zhou, Xiaolin
Higher Status Honesty Is Worth More: The Effect of Social Status on Honesty Evaluation
title Higher Status Honesty Is Worth More: The Effect of Social Status on Honesty Evaluation
title_full Higher Status Honesty Is Worth More: The Effect of Social Status on Honesty Evaluation
title_fullStr Higher Status Honesty Is Worth More: The Effect of Social Status on Honesty Evaluation
title_full_unstemmed Higher Status Honesty Is Worth More: The Effect of Social Status on Honesty Evaluation
title_short Higher Status Honesty Is Worth More: The Effect of Social Status on Honesty Evaluation
title_sort higher status honesty is worth more: the effect of social status on honesty evaluation
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5869916/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29615948
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00350
work_keys_str_mv AT bluephilipr higherstatushonestyisworthmoretheeffectofsocialstatusonhonestyevaluation
AT hujie higherstatushonestyisworthmoretheeffectofsocialstatusonhonestyevaluation
AT zhouxiaolin higherstatushonestyisworthmoretheeffectofsocialstatusonhonestyevaluation