Neural correlates of proposers’ fairness perception in punishment and non-punishment economic games
- 21 Downloads
In economic games, people acting as responders always hope to be treated fairly; otherwise they may punish proposers even sacrificing own monetary gains. However, people often treat others unequally when they become proposers, especially in the absence of punishment mechanisms. Will people lose fairness perception when they become proposers? Previous researches mainly focused on the fairness perception of responders, few paid attentions to that of proposers. In present study, we used event-related potentials (ERPs) to record the neural activities of participants acting as proposers in the ultimatum game and the dictator game, corresponding to punishment condition and non-punishment condition respectively. In each trial, a participant could choose an offer from three categories: absolutely unfair, relatively unfair and fair. Behavioral results indicate that the proposers would choose more highly unfair offers that are beneficial to themselves in a non-punishment condition than in a punishment condition. However, no matter whether there was punishment mechanism, more highly unfair offers elicited larger MFN. This finding may reflect the existence of the proposers’ unfairness aversion and guilty feeling triggered by intentional violations of social fairness norm and shows that the proposers do not give up the fairness norm in the cockles of the heart even in a non-punishment environment.
KeywordsProposers’ fairness perception Punishment and non-punishment conditions Ultimatum game and dictator game Event-related potentials Unfairness aversion Guilty feeling
This research was supported by Grant No.70671092, 70971116 and 90924304 from the National Natural Science Foundation of China, and No. 13YJA630006 from the MOE (Ministry of Education) Project of Humanities and Social Sciences of China.
MC: Main research conceptual framework and reporting.
XZ: Literature collection/review.
JZ: Literature review reorganization and discussion deepening.
GM: Methods and initial reporting.
YW: Design, data collection and analysis.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
- De Waal, F. B. (2008). Putting the altruism back into altruism: The evolution of empathy. Annual Review of Psychology, 59(1), 279–300. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093625.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Fehr, E., and Schmidt, K. (2005). The economics of fairness, reciprocity and altruism: Experimental evidence and new theories. Handbook of the Economics Giving, Altruism and Reciprocity, Vol 1. (pp. 615-691). Amsterdam, North-Holland.Google Scholar
- Fiori, M., Lintas, A., Mesrobian, S., & Villa, A. E. P. (2013). Effect of emotion and personality on deviation from purely rational decision-making. Studies in Computational Intelligence, 474, 129–161.Google Scholar
- Friedman, D., Nessler, D., Johnson, R., Jr., Ritter, W., & Bersick, M. (2007). Age-related changes in executive function: An event-related potential (erp) investigation of task-switching. Neuropsychology, Development, and Cognition. Section B, Aging, Neuropsychology and Cognition, 15(1), 95–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Gilligan, J. (1976). Beyond morality: Psychoanalytic reflections on shame, guilt and love. In T. Lickona (Ed.), Moral development and behavior: Theory, research and social issues (pp. 144–158). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
- Güroğlu, B., Bos, W. V. D., Dijk, E. V., Rombouts, S. A. R. B., & Crone, E. A. (2011). Dissociable brain networks involved in development of fairness considerations: Understanding intentionality behind unfairness. Neuroimage, 57(2), 634–641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.04.032.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Holroyd, C. B., Nieuwenhuis, S., Mars, R. B., & Coles, M. G. H. (2004). Anterior cingulate cortex, selection for action, and error processing. Posner M.i.cognitive Neuroscience of Attention, 219–231.Google Scholar
- Hu, J. (2008). The letter, validity and findings of the Chinese version of the questionnaire questionnaire. Chinese Journal of Health Psychology, 16(2), 236–238.Google Scholar
- Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development: The nature and validity of moral stages. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
- Sutton, R. S., & Barton, A. G. (1998). Reinforcement learning: An Introduction. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Zahn-Waxier, C., & Kochanska, G. (1990). The origins of guilt. In R. A. Thompson (Ed.), The Nebraska symposium on motivation 1988: Socioemotional development (Vol. 36, pp. 182–258). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
- Zaki, J., & Mitchell, J. P. (2011). Equitable decision making is associated with neural markers of intrinsic value. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(49), 19761–19766. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1112324108.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar