Hey, what is your choice? Uncertainty and inconsistency enhance subjective anticipation of upcoming information in a social context
- 155 Downloads
This research examined whether uncertainty would modulate subjective anticipation during social interactions as it does in the non-social context, and further explored how response consistency between participants would influence one’s anticipation. We set up an encyclopedic knowledge quiz involving two anonymous same-sex players and manipulated the difficulty of proposed questions (high-uncertainty accompanies highly difficult questions). An enlarged stimulus-preceding negativity was observed when participants were anticipating the presentation of their counterparts’ responses to high-uncertainty questions (versus low-uncertainty ones), as well as when they were anticipating the display of correct answers to high-uncertainty questions after they found out that responses given by their partners were inconsistent (versus consistent) with their own. In addition, inconsistent responses gave rise to a more salient difference wave reward positivity and a more positive P300 during the feedback stage. Taken together, these results suggested that both uncertainty and inconsistency would enhance subjective anticipation of upcoming information during social interactions, and that inconsistency would strengthen one’s concern and attention over outcomes.
KeywordsUncertainty Consistency Subjective anticipation Event-related potentials Stimulus-preceding negativity Reward positivity
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [Grant number: 71701131, 71471163, 71702105], Humanities and Social Sciences Research Fund supported by Ministry of Education of China [Grant number: 17YJC630104], “Chen Guang” project [Grant number: 16CG36] supported by Shanghai Municipal Education Commission and Shanghai Education Development Foundation, the Planning Fund of Shanghai International Studies University [Grant number: 20161140012], and Chinese Academy of Engineering [2018-XY-45].
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
- Ait Oumeziane B, Schryer-Praga J, Foti D (2017) “Why don’t they ‘like’ me more?”: comparing the time courses of social and monetary reward processing. Neuropsychologia 107:48–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.11.001 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Damen E, Brunia C (1987) Changes in heart rate and slow brain potentials related to motor preparation and stimulus anticipation in a time estimation task. Psychophysiology 24:700–713. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1987.tb00353.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Di Domenico SI, Le A, Liu Y, Ayaz H, Fournier MA (2016) Basic psychological needs and neurophysiological responsiveness to decisional conflict: an event-related potential study of integrative self processes. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 16:848–865. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-016-0436-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hillyard SA, Mangun GR, Woldorff MG, Luck SJ (1995) Neural systems mediating selective attention. In: Gazzaniga MS (ed) The cognitive neurosciences. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 665–682Google Scholar
- Luck SJ, Kappenman ES (2011) The Oxford handbook of event-related potential components. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
- Miller GA, Gratton G, Yee CM (1988) Generalized implementation of an eye movement correction procedure. Psychophysiology 25:241–243. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1988.tb00999.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Pornpattananangkul N, Nadig A, Heidinger S, Walden K, Nusslock R (2017) Elevated outcome-anticipation and outcome-evaluation ERPs associated with a greater preference for larger-but-delayed rewards. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 17:625–641. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-017-0501-4 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Van der Molen MJ, Poppelaars ES, Van Hartingsveldt CT, Harrewijn A, Gunther Moor B, Westenberg PM (2013) Fear of negative evaluation modulates electrocortical and behavioral responses when anticipating social evaluative feedback. Front Hum Neurosci 7:936. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00936 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar