School of Psychology, Center for Studies of Psychological Application and Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science of Guangdong Province, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China.
Department of Psychology, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Hum Brain Mapp. 2018 Jul;39(7):3086-3103. doi: 10.1002/hbm.24062. Epub 2018 Mar 26.
People often anticipate certain benefits when making dishonest decisions. In this article, we aim to dissociate the neural-cognitive processes of (1) dishonest decisions that focus on overall benefits of being dishonest (regardless of whether the benefits are self-serving or prosocial) from (2) those that distinguish between self-serving and prosocial benefits. Thirty-one participants had the opportunity to maximize their monetary benefits by voluntarily making dishonest decisions while undergoing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). In each trial, the monetary benefit of being dishonest was either self-serving or prosocial. Behaviorally, we found dissociable patterns of dishonest decisions: some participants were dishonest for overall benefits, while others were primarily dishonest for self-serving (compared with prosocial) benefits. When provided an opportunity to be dishonest for either self-serving or prosocial benefits, participants with a stronger overall tendency to be dishonest had stronger vmPFC activity, as well as stronger functional connectivity between the vmPFC and dlPFC. Furthermore, vmPFC activity was associated with decisions to be dishonest both when the benefits of being dishonest were self-serving and prosocial. Conversely, high self-serving-biased participants had stronger striatum activity and stronger functional connectivity between the striatum and middle-mPFC when they had a chance to be dishonest for self-serving (compared with prosocial) benefits. Altogether, we showed that activity in (and functional connectivity between) regions in the valuation (e.g., vmPFC and Str) and executive control (e.g., dlPFC and mmPFC) systems play a key role in registering the social-related goal of dishonest decisions.
人们在做出不诚实的决策时,往往会预期某些好处。在本文中,我们旨在将(1)关注不诚实整体收益的不诚实决策的神经认知过程与(2)区分自利收益和亲社会收益的决策过程区分开来。31 名参与者有机会通过自愿做出不诚实的决策来最大化他们的货币收益,同时接受功能磁共振成像(fMRI)扫描。在每次试验中,不诚实的货币收益要么是自利的,要么是亲社会的。从行为上看,我们发现不诚实决策存在可分离的模式:一些参与者不诚实是为了整体收益,而另一些参与者主要是为了自利(相对于亲社会)收益而不诚实。当有机会不诚实地追求自利或亲社会的利益时,那些总体上更倾向于不诚实的参与者表现出更强的 vmPFC 活动,以及 vmPFC 和 dlPFC 之间更强的功能连接。此外,vmPFC 活动与不诚实决策相关,无论是在不诚实的收益是自利的还是亲社会的情况下。相反,当有机会不诚实地追求自利(相对于亲社会)收益时,高自利偏向的参与者表现出更强的纹状体活动和纹状体与中扣带回之间更强的功能连接。总的来说,我们表明,(价值评估系统中的活动,例如 vmPFC 和纹状体)和执行控制(例如 dlPFC 和 mmPFC)系统中的区域的活动以及它们之间的功能连接在记录不诚实决策的社会相关目标方面起着关键作用。