Specific neural correlates of successful learning and adaptation during social exchanges

Smith-Collins, Adam P.R.; Fiorentini, Chiara; Kessler, Esther; Boyd, Harriet; Roberts, Fiona; Skuse, David

doi:10.1093/scan/nss079

Cited by 13 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, the current findings also extend the results described by Smith-Collins et al (2013) . These authors investigated how participants make decisions in a trust game where the same and new partners re-appear in consecutive rounds and feedback is given.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…trusting after unexpected cooperation or distrusting after unexpected betrayal. While Smith-Collins et al (2013) focus on the response towards an identifiable partner when group composition is changing, we show that trust-based learning (with increasing caudate activity over time) can also take place based on expectations of the entire group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

“…The caudate nucleus has previously been shown to be the key structure involved in establishing stimulus-response contingencies ( Packard and Knowlton, 2002 ; O'Doherty et al , 2004 ). It becomes more active with perseveration and therefore plays an important role in the decision to either update behavior or maintain the status quo ( Baumgartner et al , 2008 ; Smith-Collins et al , 2013 ; Waegeman et al , 2014 ). In a repeated dyadic trust game, the caudate nucleus is reported to become increasingly activated as partners are gaining more experience with each other, with peak activity reported at the moment the investor anticipates positive reciprocation ( King-Casas et al , 2005 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Trust as commodity: social value orientation affects the neural substrates of learning to cooperate

Lambert¹,

Declerck²,

Emonds³

et al. 2017

Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals differ in their motives and strategies to cooperate in social dilemmas. These differences are reflected by an individual’s social value orientation: proselfs are strategic and motivated to maximize self-interest, while prosocials are more trusting and value fairness. We hypothesize that when deciding whether or not to cooperate with a random member of a defined group, proselfs, more than prosocials, adapt their decisions based on past experiences: they ‘learn’ instrumentally to form a base-line expectation of reciprocity. We conducted an fMRI experiment where participants (19 proselfs and 19 prosocials) played 120 sequential prisoner’s dilemmas against randomly selected, anonymous and returning partners who cooperated 60% of the time. Results indicate that cooperation levels increased over time, but that the rate of learning was steeper for proselfs than for prosocials. At the neural level, caudate and precuneus activation were more pronounced for proselfs relative to prosocials, indicating a stronger reliance on instrumental learning and self-referencing to update their trust in the cooperative strategy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 79%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Trust as commodity: social value orientation affects the neural substrates of learning to cooperate

Lambert¹,

Declerck²,

Emonds³

et al. 2017

Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A series of studies using the trust game have suggested that learning about the trustworthiness of others is associated with activity in the brain's reward circuitry that mimics activity seen during learning about (non-social) reward values of objects [47][48][49][50][51][52] . For instance, information about the trustee's moral character 47 or experience with a trustee's behaviour 50 changed both neural activity in the striatum during the outcome phase of each round and subsequent investment behaviour in the game, and these effects changed over the course of the experiment.…”

Section: Learning About Othersmentioning

confidence: 99%

The neurobiology of rewards and values in social decision making

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Of all the decisions in your life, which were the most important? Chances are high that many of them had a social component, be it when deciding about others (for example, whether to marry someone), for others (for example, which school to send your child to) or jointly with others (for example, whether to buy a house with your partner). Pathological changes specifically in the social aspects of decision making are pervasive in many psychiatric 1 and neurological 2 disorders and can have devastating consequences for individual and collective welfare. A good understanding of the neural basis of social decision making is thus an important aim of scientists in many disciplines, from basic neuroscience to medicine, psychology and economics.The neural mechanisms underlying social and nonsocial types of choices have traditionally been examined from different theoretical angles. In studies of non-social choices (for example, purchasing decisions), researchers have often focused on neural value computations associated with the rewarding properties of the choice options 3,4 . On the basis of this research, several brain structures have been proposed as elements of a brain valuation system (BOX 1). The neural value signals in these structures are thought to represent a 'common currency' for assessing the motivational relevance of all possible stimuli or actions, which is essential for guiding decision making across varying contexts 5,6 . By contrast, researchers studying social decisions have traditionally paid less attention to motivational processes, such as reward and value coding; instead, they have focused on identifying neurocognitive processes that may have uniquely evolved to guide social behaviour 7 . This emphasis on 'social-specific cognition' has identified, for example, that different visual areas seem to be functionally specialized for the perception of faces or bodies 8 and that the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC) and the temporoparietal junction (TPJ) may be specifically involved in representing the intentions, emotions or actions of other people [9][10][11] . The idea of 'social-specific cognition' thus implies that the control of social and non-social behaviour should fundamentally differ in terms of neural architecture and information processing demands 12 . However, this view is challenged by recent findings that social decisions may also draw on value-related brain processes that strongly resemble those seen during non-social decisions. This apparent overlap in neural representations of motivational relevance for social and non-social choices is often taken to implicitly extend the 'common currency' idea to decisions based on social factors. This proposalthat choices in both social and non-social situations are steered by identical neural value computations -therefore questions whether the motivational control of social behaviour requires dedicated neural processes.In this Review, we propose a framework for studying the possible neurobiological links in the motivational control of social...

show abstract

“…Accordingly, we first identified consistent brain activations in the trust stage of the one-shot IG and the multiround IG, and then investigated common and different neural patterns of these stages. Moreover, activations in the AI and striatum have been found not only during the trust stage, but also the reciprocity and feedback stage of the multiround IG, respectively [Baumgartner et al, 2009;Chang et al, 2011;Fareri et al, 2015;King-Casas et al, 2005;Smith-Collins et al, 2013]. Thus, our second aim was to determine whether decisions to reciprocate and feedback learning involve different neural mechanisms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural signatures of trust in reciprocity: A coordinate‐based meta‐analysis

Bellucci

Chernyak

Goodyear

et al. 2016

Human Brain Mapping

134

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trust in reciprocity (TR) is defined as the risky decision to invest valued resources in another party with the hope of mutual benefit. Several fMRI studies have investigated the neural correlates of TR in one-shot and multi-round versions of the investment game (IG). However, an overall characterization of the underlying neural networks remains elusive. Here, we employed a coordinate-based meta-analysis (activation likelihood estimation method, 30 papers) to investigate consistent brain activations in each of the IG stages (i.e., the trust, reciprocity and feedback stage). Our results showed consistent activations in the anterior insula (AI) during trust decisions in the one-shot IG and decisions to reciprocate in the multi-round IG, likely related to representations of aversive feelings. Moreover, decisions to reciprocate also consistently engaged the intraparietal sulcus, probably involved in evaluations of the reciprocity options. On the contrary, trust decisions in the multi-round IG consistently activated the ventral striatum, likely associated with reward prediction error signals. Finally, the dorsal striatum was found consistently recruited during the feedback stage of the multi-round IG, likely related to reinforcement learning. In conclusion, our results indicate different neural networks underlying trust, reciprocity and feedback learning. These findings suggest that although decisions to trust and reciprocate may elicit aversive feelings likely evoked by the uncertainty about the decision outcomes and the pressing requirements of social standards, multiple interactions allow people to build interpersonal trust for cooperation via a learning mechanism by which they arguably learn to distinguish trustworthy from untrustworthy partners.

show abstract

Specific neural correlates of successful learning and adaptation during social exchanges

Cited by 13 publications

References 44 publications

Trust as commodity: social value orientation affects the neural substrates of learning to cooperate

Trust as commodity: social value orientation affects the neural substrates of learning to cooperate

The neurobiology of rewards and values in social decision making

Neural signatures of trust in reciprocity: A coordinate‐based meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About