Neural responses of in-group “favoritism” and out-group “discrimination” toward moral behaviors

Mei, Dongmei; Zhang, Wenjian; Liu, Yin

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2020.107375

Cited by 9 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a UG protocol, the amplitude of frontal N1 was modulated by the facial attractiveness of the player (Ma and Hu, 2015 ; Weiss et al, 2020 ) and the following observed nonverbal social interactions (friendly vs. nonfriendly) with proposers (Moore et al, 2021 ). Parietal N1 amplitude was reported in association with the process of emotional stimuli regardless of the trustworthiness of the player (Mei et al, 2020 ). In UG, it was observed that an increase in P2 is larger in response to high-value over low-value offers (Weiss et al, 2020 ), in participants informed by the opponent's low social status (Hu et al, 2014 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrophysiological Markers of Fairness and Selfishness Revealed by a Combination of Dictator and Ultimatum Games

Miraghaie

Pouretemad

Villa

et al. 2022

Front. Syst. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individual behavior during financial decision making is motivated by fairness, but an unanswered question from previous studies is whether particular patterns of brain activity correspond to different profiles of fairness. Event Related Potentials (ERPs) were recorded from 39 participants who played the role of allocators in a Dictator Game (DG) and responders in an Ultimatum Game (UG). Two very homogeneous groups were formed by fair and selfish individuals. At fronto-central cortical sites, the latency of ERP early negativity (N1) was 10 ms shorter in selfish participants than in fair participants. In fair DG players, the subsequent positive wave P2 suggested that more cognitive resources were required when they allocated the least gains to the other party. P2 latency and amplitude in the selfish group supported the hypothesis that these participants tended to maximize their profit. During UG, we observed that medial frontal negativity (MFN) occurred earlier and with greater amplitude when selfish participants rejected less favorable endowment shares. In this case, all players received zero payoffs, which showed that MFN in selfish participants was associated with a spiteful punishment. At posterior-parietal sites, we found that the greater the selfishness, the greater the amplitude of the late positive component (LPC). Our results bring new evidence to the existence of specific somatic markers associated with the activation of distinct cerebral circuits by the evaluation of fair and unfair proposals in participants characterized by different expressions of perceived fairness, thus suggesting that a particular brain dynamics could be associated with moral decisions.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Electrophysiological Markers of Fairness and Selfishness Revealed by a Combination of Dictator and Ultimatum Games

Miraghaie

Pouretemad

Villa

et al. 2022

Front. Syst. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The in-groups to which we then belong, our social identities (e.g., race, political party), provide self-enhancement and positive distinctiveness (Hogg, 2018; Tajfel, 1974), or a belief that one’s in-group (political party, say) is better than their out-group (Hogg, 2018). There is also motivation to maintain these positive beliefs about oneself as a member of one’s in-groups (Hogg, 2018), a tendency so powerful that research has even found neurobiological differences when people are thinking about in-group versus out-group moral dilemmas, further bolstering in-group favoritism and out-group discrimination (Mei et al, 2020). In the context of political divisions, then, people may draw self-enhancement and positive distinctiveness from their political group membership, and be motivated to maintain these positive forces on their self-esteem, impacting the types of media we consume and contributing to affective polarization.…”

Section: The Break Down In Intergroup Dialogue and Polarizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A breakdown (and rebuilding) of intergroup dialogue.

Miles¹,

Shinew²

2022

Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: We argue the January 6th, 2021, insurrection represents the culmination of a breakdown of intergroup dialogue in the U.S. We further argue that group psychologists and group psychotherapists can help us understand the antecedents and outcomes of this breakdown and provide a productive way forward through fostering and facilitating intergroup dialogue and researching the process and outcomes of this small group intervention. Method: We review research related to some of the antecedents of a breakdown of dialogue across groups in the U.S. (e.g., affective polarization and social media) to highlight a need for more meaningful intergroup contact that reduces political and other identity-based (e.g., racial) segregation and builds intergroup understanding and empathy. Results: We illustrate how intergroup dialogue, a small group intervention, can help begin to address some of the antecedents and consequences of the breakdown in dialogue that preceded the insurrection on a local level. Conclusion: We conclude that group psychologists and group psychotherapists should devote efforts to understanding the process and outcomes of difficult intergroup dialogues (including how to increase participation in these dialogues), and use their group work skills to facilitate these dialogues on a local level.

show abstract

“…Studies 1 and 2 focused on participants’ willingness to donate to or volunteer in pandemic contexts. In Study 3, participants were asked to rate their willingness to offer help in pandemic situations, non-pandemic situations where help was not provided via charity, and their other-regarding tendency in the dictator game (i.e., a commonly used economic game [ 19 , 55 ]). Through comparing ratings between two conditions where the misconduct and nonmisconduct news were presented, the impact of charity misconduct news on individuals’ general helping tendencies was investigated.…”

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a common phenomenon [ 16 ], deception is morally unacceptable [ 17 ]. Direct victims of deception suffer substantial psychological distress besides financial distress [ 18 ] and would allocate less money to deceivers in a dictator game [ 19 ]. The experience of being deceived impairs individuals’ likeability toward liars [ 20 ], harms trust that cannot be fully recovered even after receiving apologies and observing trustworthy actions [ 21 ], and elicits higher activity in the anterior insula [ 17 ] that is associated with social emotions [ 22 ], disgust, aversion, negative arousal, and processing negative experiences [ 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Charity Misconduct on Public Health Issues Impairs Willingness to Offer Help

Liu

Mao

2021

IJERPH

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Charity organizations positively impact our societies but charity misconduct impairs people’s willingness to contribute to charity and functional health systems on public health issues. This study investigates the impact of charity misconduct on people’s willingness to offer help on public health issues and possible ways of reducing the negative impact brought by charity misconduct news through four studies (Ntotal = 1269). Results showed that charity misconduct on public health issues significantly reduced individuals’ willingness to offer help via both the charity involved with the misconduct and any charity they prefer (Study 1 and 2). Furthermore, news on charity misconduct reduced people’s general willingness to help in contexts that did not involve charity (Study 3). Finally, presenting charity nonmisconduct news after charity misconduct news increases individuals’ willingness to offer help via the nonmisconduct charity (Study 4), suggesting a potential way to nudge people to provide help in the fight against the negative impact brought by charity misconduct news. The findings show the backfire of reporting charity misconduct news and have important implications for potential ways to facilitate people to offer help.

show abstract

Neural responses of in-group “favoritism” and out-group “discrimination” toward moral behaviors

Cited by 9 publications

References 40 publications

Electrophysiological Markers of Fairness and Selfishness Revealed by a Combination of Dictator and Ultimatum Games

Electrophysiological Markers of Fairness and Selfishness Revealed by a Combination of Dictator and Ultimatum Games

A breakdown (and rebuilding) of intergroup dialogue.

Charity Misconduct on Public Health Issues Impairs Willingness to Offer Help

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About