The temporal course of the influence of anxiety on fairness considerations

Luo, Yi; Wu, Tingting; Broster, Lucas S.; Feng, Chunliang; Zhang, Dandan; Gu, Ruolei; Luo, Yuejia

doi:10.1111/psyp.12235

Cited by 58 publications

(85 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the social domain, previous research also showed that violation of the social norm would give rise to larger FRN amplitude [9–11,21]. Although non-binding in nature, compliance with the commitment was generally deemed as a social norm, and failing to do so would be regarded as a severe violation of the norm, which might lead to the commitment effect in the non-reward condition in the current study.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 50%

You Have My Word: Reciprocity Expectation Modulates Feedback-Related Negativity in the Trust Game

Meng

Shen

2015

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Promise is one of the most powerful tools producing trust and facilitating cooperation, and sticking to the promise is deemed as a key social norm in social interactions. The present study explored the extent to which promise would influence investors’ decision-making in the trust game where promise had no predictive value regarding trustees’ reciprocation. In addition, we examined the neural underpinnings of the investors’ outcome processing related to the trustees’ promise keeping and promise breaking. Consistent with our hypothesis, behavioral results indicated that promise could effectively increase the investment frequency of investors. Electrophysiological results showed that, promise induced larger differentiated-FRN responses to the reward and non-reward discrepancy. Taken together, these results suggested that promise would promote cooperative behavior, while breach of promise would be regarded as a violation of the social norm, corroborating the vital role of non-enforceable commitment in social decision making.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 50%

You Have My Word: Reciprocity Expectation Modulates Feedback-Related Negativity in the Trust Game

Meng

Shen

2015

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this sample, individuals with STAI-T scores in the upper 25% of the distribution were considered as high-trait anxiety subjects4950 and passed into a second-level screen. Among the high-trait anxiety sample, individuals with BDI-II scores ≤13 were labeled as nondepressed subjects, whereas individuals scored >13 in BDI-II were labeled as depressed subjects.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural correlates underlying impaired memory facilitation and suppression of negative material in depression

Zhang

Xie

Liu

et al. 2016

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous behavioral studies demonstrated that depressed individuals have difficulties in forgetting unwanted, especially negative, event. However, inconsistent results still exit and the neural mechanism of this phenomenon has not been investigated. This study examined the intentional memory facilitation/suppression of negative and neutral materials in depression using Think/No-Think paradigm. We found that compared with nondepressed group, depressed group recalled more negative items, irrespective of either "Think" or "No-Think" instructions. Accordingly, the frontal N2 (reflecting voluntary memory inhibition) and parietal late positive component (LPC) (reflecting conscious recollection) showed deflection for negative items in depressed compared with nondepressed participants. On the one hand, the reduced N2 for negative "No-Think" items indicated that depressed individuals have low motivation to suppress negative items so intentional forgetting is less successful for mood-congruent events. On the other hand, the enhanced LPC for negative "Think" items suggested that negative memories are excessively revisited by depressed participants (compared with nondepressed ones) due to their mood-congruent and intrusive nature. Thus we demonstrated that depressed individuals show behavioral and ERP deviations from healthy controls for both voluntary suppression and conscious retrieval of negative memory; the two abnormalities of memory control together contribute to the difficulties in forgetting negative material in depression.

show abstract

“…The P3 is a centro‐parietal positivity that appears after the FRN when elicited by outcome feedback (Polezzi, Sartori, Rumiati, Vidotto, & Daum, 2010; Wu & Zhou, 2009; Zhang et al., 2013). When investigating feedback processing, the P3 is often associated with the emotional significance of outcome feedback (Gu et al., 2011; Luo et al., 2014; Wu & Zhou, 2009). Both the FRN and the P3 have been reported to be sensitive to the degree of information uncertainty, but it is unclear whether they reflect different aspects of ambiguous feedback processing (Ernst & Steinhauser, 2015; Gibbons, Schnuerch, & Stahl, 2016; Hirsh & Inzlicht, 2008; Polezzi et al., 2008; Polich, 1990).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Valence and magnitude ambiguity in feedback processing

Xue

Broster

et al. 2017

Brain and Behavior

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundOutcome feedback which indicates behavioral consequences are crucial for reinforcement learning and environmental adaptation. Nevertheless, outcome information in daily life is often totally or partially ambiguous. Studying how people interpret this kind of information would provide important knowledge about the human evaluative system.MethodsThis study concentrates on the neural processing of partially ambiguous feedback, that is, either its valence or magnitude is unknown to participants. To address this topic, we sequentially presented valence and magnitude information; electroencephalography (EEG) response to each kind of presentation was recorded and analyzed. The event‐related potential components feedback‐related negativity (FRN) and P3 were used as indices of neural activity.ResultsConsistent with previous literature, the FRN elicited by ambiguous valence was not significantly different from that elicited by negative valence. On the other hand, the FRN elicited by ambiguous magnitude was larger than both the large and small magnitude, indicating the motivation to seek unambiguous magnitude information. The P3 elicited by ambiguous valence and ambiguous magnitude was not significantly different from that elicited by negative valence and small magnitude, respectively, indicating the emotional significance of feedback ambiguity. Finally, the aforementioned effects also manifested in the stage of information integration.ConclusionThese findings indicate both similarities and discrepancies between the processing of valence ambiguity and that of magnitude ambiguity, which may help understand the mechanisms of ambiguous information processing.

show abstract

The temporal course of the influence of anxiety on fairness considerations

Cited by 58 publications

References 63 publications

You Have My Word: Reciprocity Expectation Modulates Feedback-Related Negativity in the Trust Game

You Have My Word: Reciprocity Expectation Modulates Feedback-Related Negativity in the Trust Game

Neural correlates underlying impaired memory facilitation and suppression of negative material in depression

Valence and magnitude ambiguity in feedback processing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About