Motivation and Emotion

, Volume 42, Issue 1, pp 118–125 | Cite as

Facial electromyography reveals dissociable affective responses in social and non-social cooperation

Original Paper


While economic standard theory explains cooperation in terms of rational decision-making, empirical studies suggest that humans have social preferences for cooperating with others. We investigated the specificity of these social preferences for interactions with human, relative to non-human, agents in a prisoner’s dilemma game. To obtain insights into emotional processes during cooperation, we measured activity of the corrugator supercilii muscle as indicator of spontaneous emotional responding during cooperation. After unreciprocated defection (free-riding), participants switched more often to a cooperative strategy and showed increased corrugator activity (suggesting more negative emotional responses) when playing with a human relative to a computer. This suggests that humans have a specific preference for cooperating with other humans and that cooperation may be promoted by unpleasant affect in response to the outcome of one’s own “free-riding”.


Prisoner’s dilemma Prosocial behaviour Electromyography Corrugator Affect 



We are grateful to Nadja Wiebe, Angelique Zessin, and Antonia Papadakis for help with data collection.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicting financial interests.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained by all participants included in the study.


  1. Axelrod, R., & Hamilton, W. D. (1981). The evolution of cooperation. Science, 211(4489), 1390–1396.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Brainard, D. H. (1997). The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10(4), 433–436.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Brosnan, S. F., Salwiczek, L., & Bshary, R. (2010). The interplay of cognition and cooperation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 365(1553), 2699–2710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Losch, M. E., & Kim, H. S. (1986). Electromyographic activity over facial muscle regions can differentiate the valence and intensity of affective reactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(2), 260–268.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Camerer, C. F. (2003). Behavioral game theory: Plausible formal models that predict accurately. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 26(2), 157–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen, X., Hackett, P. D., DeMarco, A. C., Feng, C., Stair, S., Haroon, E., … Rilling, J. K. (2015). Effects of oxytocin and vasopressin on the neural response to unreciprocated cooperation within brain regions involved in stress and anxiety in men and women. Brain Imaging and Behavior, 10(2), 581–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Croson, R., & Gneezy, U. (2009). Gender differences in preferences. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(2), 448–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Declerck, C. H., Boone, C., & Kiyonari, T. (2014). No place to hide: When shame causes proselfs to cooperate. Journal of Social Psychology, 154(1), 74–88.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Dimberg, U. (1990). Facial electromyography and emotional reactions. Psychophysiology, 27(5), 481–494.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Dimberg, U., & Petterson, M. (2000). Facial reactions to happy and angry facial expressions: Evidence for right hemisphere dominance. Psychophysiology, 37(5), 693–696.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Dunning, D. (2017). Normative goals and the regulation of social behavior: The case of respect. Motivation and Emotion. Scholar
  12. Fehr, E., & Camerer, C. F. (2007). Social neuroeconomics: The neural circuitry of social preferences. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(10), 419–427.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Fridlund, A. J., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Guidelines for human electromyographic research. Psychophysiology, 23(5), 567–589.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Hu, S., & Wan, H. (2003). Imagined events with specific emotional valence produce specific patterns of facial EMG activity. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 97(3 Pt 2), 1091–1099.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Ketelaar, T., & Au, W. T. (2003). The effects of feelings of guilt on the behaviour of uncooperative individuals in repeated social bargaining games: An affect-as-information interpretation of the role of emotion in social interaction. Cognition & Emotion, 17(3), 429–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kuo, W. J., Sjostrom, T., Chen, Y. P., Wang, Y. H., & Huang, C. Y. (2009). Intuition and deliberation: Two systems for strategizing in the brain. Science, 324(5926), 519–522.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Larsen, J. T., Norris, C. J., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2003). Effects of positive and negative affect on electromyographic activity over zygomaticus major and corrugator supercilii. Psychophysiology, 40(5), 776–785.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Milinski, M., & Wedekind, C. (1998). Working memory constrains human cooperation in the Prisoner’s Dilemma. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 95(23), 13755–13758.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Rand, D. G. (2017). Social dilemma cooperation (unlike dictator game giving) is intuitive for men as well as women. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (forthcoming). Available at SSRN:
  20. Rand, D. G., Brescoll, V. L., Everett, J. A., Capraro, V., & Barcelo, H. (2016). Social heuristics and social roles: Intuition favors altruism for women but not for men. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145(4), 389–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rilling, J., Gutman, D., Zeh, T., Pagnoni, G., Berns, G., & Kilts, C. (2002). A neural basis for social cooperation. Neuron, 35(2), 395–405.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Rilling, J. K., DeMarco, A. C., Hackett, P. D., Thompson, R., Ditzen, B., Patel, R., & Pagnoni, G. (2012). Effects of intranasal oxytocin and vasopressin on cooperative behavior and associated brain activity in men. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 37(4), 447–461.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Rilling, J. K., Gutman, D., Zeh, T., Pagnoni, G., Berns, G., & Kilts, C. (2002). A neural basis for social cooperation. Neuron, 35(2), 395–405.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Rilling, J. K., Sanfey, A. G., Aronson, J. A., Nystrom, L. E., & Cohen, J. D. (2004). Opposing BOLD responses to reciprocated and unreciprocated altruism in putative reward pathways. Neuroreport, 15(16), 2539–2543.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Sakaiya, S., Shiraito, Y., Kato, J., Ide, H., Okada, K., Takano, K., & Kansaku, K. (2013). Neural correlate of human reciprocity in social interactions. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 7, 239.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Soutschek, A., Sauter, M., & Schubert, T. (2015). The importance of the lateral prefrontal cortex for strategic decision making in the Prisoner’s dilemma. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 15(4), 854–860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Soutschek, A., & Schubert, T. (2016). The importance of working memory updating in the Prisoner’s dilemma. Psychological Research, 80(2), 172–180.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Trivers, R. L. (1971). Evolution of reciprocal altruism. Quarterly Review of Biology, 46(1), 35–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Weinreich, A., Strobach, T., & Schubert, T. (2015). Expertise in video game playing is associated with reduced valence-concordant emotional expressivity. Psychophysiology, 52(1), 59–66.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratory for Social and Neural Systems Research, Department of EconomicsUniversity of ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Institute for PsychologyHumboldt-Universität zu BerlinBerlinGermany
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyMartin-Luther UniversityHalleGermany

Personalised recommendations