Blue Philip R, Hu Jie, Zhou Xiaolin
Center for Brain and Cognitive Sciences and School of Psychological and Cognitive Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Key Laboratory of Machine Perception, Ministry of Education, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Front Psychol. 2018 Mar 20;9:350. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00350. eCollection 2018.
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.
承诺对于维持社会等级制度中的信任至关重要。众所周知,并非所有承诺都会兑现;然而,社会地位对承诺兑现或未兑现的反应的影响,以及这种影响背后的神经过程,却远未被理解。在这里,我们在测量参与者在重复信任博弈(TG)中作为投资者的投资行为之前,操纵了他们的社会地位。参与者在得知其社会地位较高或较低的合作伙伴要么承诺返还翻倍金额的一半(4倍投资额)、未承诺,要么没有机会承诺之后,决定向其合作伙伴(在TG中充当受托人)投资多少。当参与者看到受托人总是在一半时间返还资金的决定时,记录事件相关电位(ERP),无论实验条件如何。受托人在承诺后决定返还或不返还分别被定义为诚实和不诚实。在行为上,当受托人承诺时,参与者的投资比受托人没有机会承诺时更多,并且这种影响在地位较高的受托人身上比地位较低的受托人身上更大。在神经层面上,当查看受托人返还资金的决定时,当受托人不返还时,参与者的内侧额叶负波(MFN)反应(开始后250 - 310毫秒)比返还时更负,这表明不返还违背了预期。P300反应仅对较高地位的返还反馈敏感,但对于较高地位合作伙伴的返还比对较低地位合作伙伴的返还更正相,这表明较高地位的返还可能更有回报/在动机上更重要。重要的是,只有主观社会经济地位(SES)较低的参与者表现出较高地位诚实(诚实 - 不诚实)比低地位诚实的P300效应增加,这表明较高地位的诚实对SES较低的参与者特别有回报/在动机上更重要。综上所述,我们的结果表明,在较早的时间窗口中,MFN编码返还效价,无论诚实或社会地位如何,而诚实和社会地位在随后的认知评估过程(P300)中得到处理。我们的研究结果表明,社会地位在行为和神经层面上都会影响对诚实的感知,并且主观SES可能会调节这种影响。