Department of Behavioural Sciences in Medicine, Institute for Basic Medical Science, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
Social, Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience Unit, Department of Cognition, Emotion, and Methods in Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Psychophysiology. 2020 Aug;57(8):e13556. doi: 10.1111/psyp.13556. Epub 2020 Feb 28.
This study used event-related potential (ERP) measurements to investigate whether error processing in a social context is modulated by top-down influence of deterministic thinking, i.e., subjective beliefs that events are pre-determined by previously existing causes. To this end, half of our participants were confronted with statements denying the existence of free will, aimed to induce more deterministic thinking, whereas the other half was assigned to a control group that read neutral statements. Thereafter, all participants performed a choice-reaction task for their own and for the benefit of a second participant. Error rates were comparable in both groups and benefit settings, while only control participants showed enhanced post-error slowing (PES) in other- compared to self-relevant trials. On the neural level, other-relevant errors elicited diminished early error signals (reduced ΔERN amplitudes) in deterministic-intervention participants compared to controls. In subsequent processing, ERPs of deterministic-intervention participants did not differentiate between the benefit settings, while controls showed reduced ΔPe amplitudes for others compared to self-relevant errors. Taken together, our findings suggest that being confronted with deterministic compared to control statements reduced subsequent processing differences between other- and self-relevant error processing. This might be beneficial in social evaluation or intergroup situations because it could decrease self-cenetred processing biases often observed in these situations.
本研究采用事件相关电位(ERP)测量来探究社会情境下的错误处理是否受到确定性思维的自上而下的影响,即主观认为事件是由先前存在的原因预先决定的。为此,我们的一半参与者被要求阅读否定自由意志存在的陈述,旨在诱导更多的确定性思维,而另一半则被分配到对照组,阅读中性陈述。之后,所有参与者都为自己和第二参与者执行了一个选择反应任务。在两组和两种利益设置下,错误率相当,而只有对照组在其他相关试验中比自我相关试验表现出更强的后错误减速(PES)。在神经水平上,与对照组相比,确定性干预组中其他相关错误引起的早期错误信号(减少的 ΔERN 幅度)减弱。在后续处理中,确定性干预组的 ERP 没有区分利益设置,而对照组对他人相关错误的 ΔPe 幅度比自我相关错误的幅度更小。总的来说,我们的研究结果表明,与控制陈述相比,面对确定性陈述会减少社会情境下自我中心处理偏差,这可能对社会评价或群体间情境有益。