Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Participants and Design
Behavioral Questionnaires
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
References
All Topics
Biology
Bioinformatics

Peer influence: neural mechanisms underlying in-group conformity

Profile image of Ale SmidtsAle Smidts

2013, Frontiers in Human Neuroscience

https://doi.org/10.3389/FNHUM.2013.00050
visibility

…

description

7 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

People often conform to the behavior of others with whom they identify. However, it is unclear what fundamental mechanisms underlie this type of conformity. Here, we investigate the processes mediating in-group conformity by using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Participants completed a perceptual decision-making task while undergoing fMRI, during which they were exposed to the judgments of both in-group and out-group members. Our data suggest that conformity to the in-group is mediated by both positive affect as well as the cognitive capacity of perspective taking. Examining the processes that drive in-group conformity by utilizing a basic decision-making paradigm combined with neuroimaging methods provides important insights into the potential mechanisms of conformity. These results may provide an integral step in developing more effective campaigns using group conformity as a tool for behavioral change.

Related papers

Disconfirmation modulates the neural correlates of the false consensus effect: A parametric modulation approach
Locke Welborn

Neuropsychologia

The False Consensus Effect (FCE)-the tendency to (erroneously) project our attitudes and opinions onto others-is an enduring bias in social reasoning with important societal implications. In this fMRI investigation, we examine the neural correlates of withinsubject variation in consensus bias on a variety of social and political issues. Bias demonstrated a strong association with activity in brain regions implicated in self-related cognition, mentalizing, and valuation. Importantly, however, recruitment of these regions predicted consensus bias only in the presence of social disconfirmation, in the form of feedback discrepant with participants' own attitudes. These results suggest that the psychological and neural mechanisms underlying the tendency to project attitudes onto others are crucially moderated by motivational factors, including the desire to affirm the normativity of one's own position. This research complements social psychological theorizing about the factors contributing to the FCE, and further emphasizes the role of motivated cognition in social reasoning. INRODUCTION The false consensus effect (FCE)-the tendency to (erroneously) presume that others share our attitudes, opinions, and beliefs-is one of the most pervasive and recalcitrant biases in human social reasoning (Ross, Green, & House, 1977; Marks & Miller, 1987). We persist in projecting our own minds on to others, even when we are made aware of the possibility of such consensus estimation bias and even when we acknowledge bias in others' judgments (Krueger &

View PDFchevron_right
Testing the reinforcement learning hypothesis of social conformity
Ayahito Ito

2020

Our preferences are influenced by the opinions of others. The past human neuroimaging studies on social conformity have identified a network of brain regions related to social conformity that includes the posterior medial frontal cortex (pMFC), anterior insula, and striatum. It was hypothesized that since these brain regions are also known to play important roles in reinforcement learning (i.e., processing prediction error), social conformity and reinforcement learning have a common neural mechanism. However, these two processes have previously never been directly compared; therefore, the extent to which they shared a common neural mechanism had remained unclear. This study aimed to formally test the hypothesis. The same group of participants (n = 25) performed social conformity and reinforcement learning tasks inside a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scanner. Univariate fMRI data analyses revealed activation overlaps in the pMFC and bilateral insula between social conf...

View PDFchevron_right
Giving others the option of choice: An fMRI study on low-cost cooperation
Paul Van Lange

Neuropsychologia, 2018

Successful social relationships require a consideration of a partner's thoughts and intentions. This aspect of social life is captured in the social mindfulness paradigm (SoMi task), in which participants make decisions that either limit or preserve options for their interaction partner's subsequent choice. Here we investigated the neural correlates of spontaneous socially mindful and unmindful behaviours. Functional magnetic resonance data were acquired from 47 healthy adolescents and young adults (age 16-27) as they completed the SoMi task. Being faced with socially relevant choices was associated with activity in the medial prefrontal cortex, anterior cingulate, caudate, and insula, which is consistent with prior neuroeconomical research. Importantly, socially mindful choices were associated with activity in the right parietal cortex and the caudate, whereas unmindful choices were associated with activity in the left prefrontal cortex. These neural findings were consisten...

View PDFchevron_right
The Brain's Temporal Dynamics from a Collective Decision to Individual Action
Christina Moutsiana

Journal of Neuroscience, 2014

Social animals constantly make decisions together. What determines if individuals will subsequently adjust their behavior to align with collective choices? Here, using functional magnetic resonance imaging in humans, we characterize a novel temporal model of brain response from the time a collective decision is made to the time an individual action is required. We reveal that whether a behavioral modification will occur is determined not necessarily by the brain's response to the initial social influence, but by how that response (specifically in the orbitofrontal cortex; OFC) is mirrored at a later time when the individual selects their own action. This result suggests that the OFC may reconstitute an initial state of collective influence when individual action is subsequently needed. Importantly, these dynamics vary across individuals as a function of trait conformity and mediate the relationship between this personality characteristic and behavioral adjustment toward the group.

View PDFchevron_right
The neural signature of social norm compliance
manfred spitzer

Neuron, 2007

All known human societies establish social order by punishing violators of social norms. However, little is known about how the human brain processes the punishment threat associated with norm violations. We use fMRI to study the neural circuitry behind forced norm compliance by comparing a treatment in which norm violations can be punished with a control treatment in which punishment is impossible. Individuals' increase in norm compliance when punishment is possible exhibits a strong positive correlation with activations in the lateral orbitofrontal cortex and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. These activations are also modulated by the social nature of the task. Moreover, activation in lateral orbitofrontal cortex shows a strong positive correlation with Machiavellian personality characteristics. These findings indicate a neural network involved in forced norm compliance that may constitute an important basis for human sociality. Different activations of this network reveal individual differences in the behavioral response to the punishment threat and may thus provide a deeper understanding of the neurobiological sources of pathologies such as antisocial personality disorder.

View PDFchevron_right
An fMRI study on the neural correlates of social conformity to a sexual minority
Marco Tullio Liuzza

Scientific Reports, 2019

View PDFchevron_right
Electrophysiological precursors of social conformity
Anna Shestakova

Humans often change their beliefs or behavior due to the behavior or opinions of others. This study explored, with the use of human event-related potentials (ERPs), whether social conformity is based on a general performance-monitoring mechanism. We tested the hypothesis that conflicts with a normative group opinion evoke a feedback-related negativity (FRN) often associated with performance monitoring and subsequent adjustment of behavior. The experimental results show that individual judgments of facial attractiveness were adjusted in line with a normative group opinion. A mismatch between individual and group opinions triggered a frontocentral negative deflection with the maximum at 200 ms, similar to FRN. Overall, a conflict with a normative group opinion triggered a cascade of neuronal responses: from an earlier FRN response reflecting a conflict with the normative opinion to a later ERP component (peaking at 380 ms) reflecting a conforming behavioral adjustment. These results add to the growing literature on neuronal mechanisms of social influence by disentangling the conflict-monitoring signal in response to the perceived violation of social norms and the neural signal of a conforming behavioral adjustment.

View PDFchevron_right
Neural mechanisms of social influence
Rebecca Dyer, Malia Mason

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2009

The present investigation explores the neural mechanisms underlying the impact of social influence on preferences. We socially tagged symbols as valued or not – by exposing participants to the preferences of their peers – and assessed subsequent brain activity during an incidental processing task in which participants viewed popular, unpopular, and novel symbols. The medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) differentiated between symbols that were and were not socially tagged – a possible index of normative influence – while aspects of the striatum (the caudate) differentiated between popular and unpopular symbols – a possible index of informational influence. These results suggest that integrating activity in these two brain regions may differentiate objects that have become valued as a result of social influence from those valued for non-social reasons.

View PDFchevron_right
Insights From fMRI Studies Into Ingroup Bias
Pascal Molenberghs

Frontiers in Psychology, 2018

Intergroup biases can manifest themselves between a wide variety of different groups such as people from different races, nations, ethnicities, political or religious beliefs, opposing sport teams or even arbitrary groups. In this review we provide a neuroscientific overview of functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) studies that have revealed how group dynamics impact on various cognitive and emotional systems at different levels of information processing. We first describe how people can perceive the faces, words and actions of ingroup and outgroup members in a biased way. Second, we focus on how activity in brain areas involved in empathizing with the pain of others, such as the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC) and anterior insula (AI), are influenced by group membership. Third, we describe how group membership influences activity in brain areas involved in mentalizing such as the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) and temporoparietal junction (TPJ). Fourth, we discuss the involvement of the lateral orbitofrontal cortex (lOFC) in increased moral sensitivity for outgroup threats. Finally, we discuss how brain areas involved in the reward system such as the striatum and medial orbitofrontal cortex (mOFC), are more active when experiencing schadenfreude for outgroup harm and when rewarding ingroup (versus outgroup) members. The value of these neuroscientific insights to better understand ingroup bias are discussed, as well as limitations and future research directions.

View PDFchevron_right
Why Do Some Find it Hard to Disagree? An fMRI Study
Pascal Molenberghs

People often find it hard to disagree with others, but how this disposition varies across individuals or how it is influenced by social factors like other people's level of expertise remains little understood. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), we found that activity across a network of brain areas [comprising posterior medial frontal cortex (pMFC), anterior insula (AI), inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), lateral orbitofrontal cortex, and angular gyrus] was modulated by individual differences in the frequency with which participants actively disagreed with statements made by others. Specifically, participants who disagreed less frequently exhibited greater brain activation in these areas when they actually disagreed. Given the role of this network in cognitive dissonance, our results suggest that some participants had more trouble disagreeing due to a heightened cognitive dissonance response. Contrary to expectation, the level of expertise (high or low) had no effect on behavior or brain activity.

View PDFchevron_right

References (59)

  1. Asch, S. (ed.). (1951). Effects of Group Pressure Upon the Modification and Distortion of Judgments. Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Press.
  2. Baer, J. S., Stacy, A., and Larimer, M. (1991). Biases in the percep- tion of drinking norms among college-students. J. Stud. Alcohol 52, 580-586.
  3. Bearden, W. O., and Etzel, M. J. (1982). Reference group influence on prod- uct and brand purchase decisions. J. Consum. Res. 9, 183-194.
  4. Beer, J. S., Stallen, M., Lombardo, M. V., Gonsalkorale, K., Cunningham, W. A., and Sherman, J. W. (2008). The Quadruple Process model approach to examining the neural underpinnings of prejudice. Neuroimage 43, 775-783.
  5. Berger, J., and Heath, C. (2007). Where consumers diverge from others: identity signaling and product domains. J. Consum. Res. 34, 121-134.
  6. Berger, J., and Heath, C. (2008). Who drives divergence? Identity signal- ing, outgroup dissimilarity, and the abandonment of cultural tastes. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 95, 593-607.
  7. Berkowitz, A. D. (2010). "Fostering healthy norms to prevent vio- lence and abuse: the social norms approach," in The Prevention of Sexual Violence: A Practitioner's Sourcebook, ed K. Kaufman (Holyoke, MA: NEARI Press), 147-172.
  8. Berns, G. S., Capra, C. M., Moore, S., and Noussair, C. (2010). Neural mechanisms of the influence of popularity on adolescent ratings of music. Neuroimage 49, 2687-2696.
  9. Berns, G. S., Chappelow, J., Zink, C. F., Pagnoni, G., Martin-Skurski, M. E., and Richards, J. (2005). Neurobiological correlates of social conformity and independence dur- ing mental rotation. Biol. Psychiatry 58, 245-253.
  10. Berns, G. S., McClure, S. M., Pagnoni, G., and Montague, P. R. (2001). Predictability modulates human brain response to reward. J. Neurosci. 21, 2793-2798.
  11. Berns, G. S., and Moore, S. E. (2012). A neural predictor of cultural pop- ularity. J. Consum. Psychol. 22, 154-160.
  12. Breiter, H. C., Aharon, I., Kahneman, D., Dale, A., and Shizgal, P. (2001). Functional imaging of neural responses to expectancy and experi- ence of monetary gains and losses. Neuron 30, 619-639.
  13. Burklund, L. J., Eisenberger, N. I., and Lieberman, M. D. (2007). The face of rejection: rejection sen- sitivity moderates dorsal anterior cingulate activity to disapproving facial expressions. Soc. Neurosci. 2, 238-253.
  14. Campbell-Meiklejohn, D. K., Bach, D. R., Roepstorff, A., Dolan, R. J., and Frith, C. D. (2010). How the opinion of others affects our val- uation of objects. Curr. Biol. 20, 1165-1170.
  15. Cialdini, R. B., and Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: compliance and conformity. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 55, 591-621.
  16. Clapp, J. D., Lange, J. E., Russell, C., Shillington, A., and Voas, R. (2003). A failed norms social mar- keting campaign. J. Stud. Alcohol 64, 409-414.
  17. Deutsch, M., and Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and social influences upon individual judg- ments. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 51, 629-636.
  18. Donaldson, S. I., Graham, J. W., and Hansen, W. B. (1994). Testing the generalizability of intervening mechanism theories: understanding the effects of adolescent drug use prevention interventions. J. Behav. Med. 17, 195-216.
  19. Drevets, W. C., Price, J. L., Simpson, J. R., Todd, R. D., Reich, T., Vannier, M., et al. (1997). Subgenual pre- frontal cortex abnormalities in mood disorders. Nature 386, 824-827.
  20. Eldridge, L. L., Knowlton, B. J., Furmanski, C. S., Bookheimer, S. Y., and Engel, S. A. (2000). Remembering episodes: a selec- tive role for the hippocampus during retrieval. Nat. Neurosci. 3, 1149-1152.
  21. Enzi, B., de Greck, M., Prösch, U., Tempelmann, C., and Northoff, G. (2009). Is our self nothing but reward? Neuronal overlap and dis- tinction between reward and per- sonal relevance and its relation to human personality. PLoS ONE 4:e8429. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone. 0008429
  22. Freeman, J. B., Schiller, D., Rule, N. O., and Ambady, N. (2010). The neural origins of superficial and individu- ated judgments about ingroup and outgroup members. Hum. Brain Mapp. 31, 150-159.
  23. Friston, K. J., Frith, C. D., Frackowiak, R. S. J., and Turner, R. (1995). Characterizing dynamic brain responses with fMRI-a multi- variate approach. Neuroimage 2, 166-172.
  24. Frith, C. D., and Frith, U. (2006). How we predict what other people are going to do. Brain Res. 1079, 36-46.
  25. Goldstein, N. J., Cialdini, R. B., and Griskevicius, V. (2008). A room with a viewpoint: using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels. J. Consum. Res. 35, 472-482.
  26. Gonsalkorale, K., Sherman, J. W., Allen, T. J., Klauer, K. C., and Amodio, D. M. (2011). Accounting for success- ful control of implicit racial bias: the roles of association activation, response monitoring, and overcom- ing bias. Pers. Soc. Psychol. B 37, 1534-1545.
  27. Granfield, R. (2005). Alcohol use in college: limitations on the transfor- mation of social norms. Addict. Res. Theory 13, 281-292.
  28. Harris, L. T., and Fiske, S. T. (2006). Dehumanizing the lowest of the low. Psychol. Sci. 17, 847-853.
  29. Heatherton, T. F. (2011). Neuroscience of self and self-regulation. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 62, 363-390.
  30. Hein, G., Silani, G., Preuschoff, K., Batson, C. D., and Singer, T. (2010). Neural responses to ingroup and outgroup members' suffering predict individual differences in costly helping. Neuron 68, 149-160.
  31. Izuma, K., Saito, D. N., and Sadato, N. (2008). Processing of social and monetary rewards in the human striatum. Neuron 58, 284-294.
  32. Jetten, J., Spears, R., and Postmes, T. (2004). Intergroup distinctiveness and differentiation: a meta-analytic integration. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 86, 862-879.
  33. Kim, M. J., Chey, J., Chung, A., Bae, S., Khang, H., Ham, B., et al. (2003). Diminished rostral ante- rior cingulate activity in response to threat-related events in posttrau- matic stress disorder. J. Psychiatr. Res. 42, 268-277.
  34. Klucharev, V., Hytonen, K., Rijpkema, M., Smidts, A., and Fernandez, G. (2009). Reinforcement learning signal predicts social conformity. Neuron 61, 140-151.
  35. Klucharev, V., Munneke, M. A. M., Smidts, A., and Fernandez, G. (2011). Downregulation of the pos- terior medial frontal cortex prevents social conformity. J. Neurosci. 31, 11934-11940.
  36. Klucharev, V., Smidts, A., and Fernandez, G. (2008). Brain mechanisms of persuasion: how 'expert power' modulates memory and attitudes. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 3, 353-366.
  37. Knutson, B., Westdorp, A., Kaiser, E., and Hommer, D. (2000). FMRI visualization of brain activity dur- ing a monetary incentive delay task. Neuroimage 12, 20-27.
  38. Mason, M. F., Dyer, R., and Norton, M. I. (2009). Neural mechanisms of social influence. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 110, 152-159.
  39. Masten, C. L., Eisenberger, N. I., Borofsky, L. A., Pfeifer, J. H., McNealy, K., Mazziotta, J. C., et al. (2009). Neural correlates of social exclusion during adolescence: understanding the distress of peer rejection. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 4, 143-157.
  40. Neighbors, C., Larimer, M. E., and Lewis, M. A. (2004). Targeting mis- perceptions of descriptive drink- ing norms: efficacy of a computer- delivered personalized normative feedback intervention. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 72, 434-447.
  41. O'Doherty, J. P., Dayan, P., Friston, K., Critchley, H., and Dolan, R. J. (2003). Temporal difference models and reward-related learning in the human brain. Neuron 38, 329-337.
  42. Peeler, C. M., Far, J., Miller, J., and Brigham, T. A. (2000). An analy- sis of the effects of a program to reduce heavy drinking among col- lege students. J. Alcohol Drug Educ. 45, 39-54.
  43. Pochon, J. B., Levy, R., Fossati, P., Lehericy, S., Poline, J. B., Pillon, B., et al. (2002). The neural system that bridges reward and cognition in humans: an fMRI study. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 99, 5669-5674.
  44. Poldrack, R. A. (2006). Can cognitive processes be inferred from neuroimaging data? Trends Cogn. Sci. 10, 59-63.
  45. Redouté, J., Stoléru, S., Grégoire, M. C., Costes, N., Cinotti, L., Lavenne, F., et al. (2000). Brain process- ing of visual sexual stimuli in human males. Hum. Brain Mapp. 11, 162-177.
  46. Schultz, P. (1999). Changing behavior with normative feedback interven- tions: a field experiment on curbside recycling. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 21, 25-36.
  47. Schultz, P. W., Nolan, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Goldstein, N. J., and Griskevicius, V. (2007). The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychol. Sci. 18, 429-434.
  48. Sharot, T., Riccardi, A. M., Raio, C. M., and Phelps, E. A. (2007). Neural mechanisms mediating optimism bias. Nature 450, 102-105.
  49. Somerville, L. H., Heatherton, T. F., and Kelley, W. M. (2006). Anterior cingulate cortex responds differen- tially to expectancy violation and social rejection. Nat. Neurosci. 9, 1007-1008.
  50. Stallen, M., de Dreu, C. K. W., Shalvi, S., Smidts, A., and Sanfey, A. G. (2012). The herding hormone: oxy- tocin stimulates in-group confor- mity. Psychol. Sci. 21, 1288-1292.
  51. Stallen, M., Smidts, A., Rijpkema, M., Smit, G., Klucharev, V., and Fernandez, G. (2010). Celebrities and shoes on the female brain: the neural correlates of product evalua- tion in the context of fame. J. Econ. Psychol. 31, 802-811.
  52. Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P., and Flament, C. (1971). Social categorization and intergroup behaviour. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 1, 149-178.
  53. Tajfel, H., and Turner, J. C. (1986). "The social identity theory of inter- group behavior," in Psychology of Intergroup Relations, eds S. Worchel and W. G. Austing (Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall), 7-24.
  54. Uncapher, M. R., Otten, L. J., and Rugg, M. D. (2006). Episodic encoding is more than the sum of its parts: an fMRI investigation of multifea- tural contextual encoding. Neuron 52, 547-556.
  55. Van Bavel, J. J., Packer, D. J., and Cunningham, W. A. (2008). The neural substrates of in-group bias. Psychol. Sci. 19, 1131-1139.
  56. Volz, K. G., Kessler, T., and von Cramon, D. Y. (2009). In-group as part of the self: in-group favoritism is mediated by medial prefrontal cortex activation. Soc. Neurosci. 4, 244-260.
  57. Wechsler, H., Nelson, T., Lee, J. E., Seiberg, M., Lewis, C., and Keeling, R. (2003). Perception and reality: a national evaluation of social norms marketing interventions to reduce college students' heavy alcohol use. Q. J. Stud. Alcohol 64, 484-494.
  58. Zaki, J., Schirmer, J., and Mitchell, J. P. (2011). Social influence modulates the neural compu- tation of value. Psychol. Sci. 22, 894-900.
  59. Zink, C. F., Tong, Y., Chen, Q., Bassett, D. S., Stein, J. L., and Meyer- Lindenberg, A. (2008). Know your place: neural processing of social hierarchy in humans. Neuron 58, 273-283.

Related papers

Brain responses to social norms: Meta-analyses of fMRI studies
Oksana Zinchenko, Marie Arsalidou

Social norms have a critical role in everyday decision-making, as frequent interaction with others regulates our behavior. Neuroimaging studies show that social-based and fairness-related decision-making activates an inconsistent set of areas, which sometimes includes the anterior insula, anterior cingulate cortex, and others lateral prefrontal cortices. Social-based decision-making is complex and variability in findings may be driven by socio-cognitive activities related to social norms. To distinguish among social-cognitive activities related to social norms, we identified 36 eligible articles in the functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) literature, which we separate into two categories (a) social norm representation and (b) norm violations. The majority of original articles (>60%) used tasks associated with fairness norms and decision-making, such as ultimatum game, dictator game, or prisoner's dilemma; the rest used tasks associated to violation of moral norms, such as scenarios and sentences of moral depravity ratings. Using quantitative meta-analyses, we report common and distinct brain areas that show concordance as a function of category. Specifically, concordance in ventromedial prefrontal regions is distinct to social norm representation processing, whereas concordance in right insula, dorsolateral prefrontal, and dorsal cingulate cortices is distinct to norm violation processing. We propose a neurocognitive model of social norms for healthy adults, which could help guide future research in social norm compliance and mechanisms of its enforcement.

View PDFchevron_right
Reinforcement Learning Signal Predicts Social Conformity
Ale Smidts

Neuron, 2009

We often change our decisions and judgments to conform with normative group behavior. However, the neural mechanisms of social conformity remain unclear. Here we show, using functional magnetic resonance imaging, that conformity is based on mechanisms that comply with principles of reinforcement learning. We found that individual judgments of facial attractiveness are adjusted in line with group opinion. Conflict with group opinion triggered a neuronal response in the rostral cingulate zone and the ventral striatum similar to the ''prediction error'' signal suggested by neuroscientific models of reinforcement learning. The amplitude of the conflictrelated signal predicted subsequent conforming behavioral adjustments. Furthermore, the individual amplitude of the conflict-related signal in the ventral striatum correlated with differences in conforming behavior across subjects. These findings provide evidence that social group norms evoke conformity via learning mechanisms reflected in the activity of the rostral cingulate zone and ventral striatum.

View PDFchevron_right
The neural substrates of in-group bias: A functional magnetic resonance imaging investigation
Jay Van Bavel

Psychological …, 2008

Classic minimal-group studies found that people arbitrarily assigned to a novel group quickly display a range of perceptual, affective, and behavioral in-group biases. We randomly assigned participants to a mixed-race team and used functional magnetic resonance imaging to identify brain regions involved in processing novel in-group and out-group members independently of preexisting attitudes, stereotypes, or familiarity. Whereas previous research on intergroup perception found amygdala activity-typically interpreted as negativity-in response to stigmatized social groups, we found greater activity in the amygdala, fusiform gyri, orbitofrontal cortex, and dorsal striatum when participants viewed novel in-group faces than when they viewed novel out-group faces. Moreover, activity in orbitofrontal cortex mediated the in-group bias in self-reported liking for the faces. These in-group biases in neural activity were not moderated by race or by whether participants explicitly attended to team membership or race, a finding suggesting that they occur relatively automatically. This study helps clarify the role of neural substrates involved in perceptual and affective in-group biases.

View PDFchevron_right
Neuronal correlates of social decision making are influenced by social value orientation-an fMRI study
Christian Montag, Armin Falk

Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience, 2015

Our decisions often have consequences for other people. Hence, self-interest and other-regarding motives are traded off in many daily-life situations. Interindividually, people differ in their tendency to behave prosocial. These differences are captured by the concept of social value orientation (SVO), which assumes stable, trait-like tendencies to act selfish or prosocial. This study investigates group differences in prosocial decision making and addresses the question of whether prosocial individuals act intuitively and selfish individuals instead need to control egoistic impulses to behave prosocially. We address this question via the interpretation of neuronal and behavioral indicators. In the present fMRI-study participants were grouped into prosocial- and selfish participants. They made decisions in multiple modified Dictator-Games (DG) that addressed self- and other-regarding motives to a varying extent (self gain, non-costly social gain, mutual gain, costly social gain). Sel...

View PDFchevron_right
The Neural Basis of Changing Social Norms through Persuasion
Adam Phillips

Scientific Reports, 2017

Social norms regulate behavior, and changes in norms have a great impact on society. In most modern societies, norms change through interpersonal communication and persuasive messages found in media. Here, we examined the neural basis of persuasion-induced changes in attitude toward and away from norms using fMRI. We measured brain activity while human participants were exposed to persuasive messages directed toward specific norms. Persuasion directed toward social norms specifically activated a set of brain regions including temporal poles, temporo-parietal junction, and medial prefrontal cortex. Beyond these regions, when successful, persuasion away from an accepted norm specifically recruited the left middle temporal and supramarginal gyri. Furthermore, in combination with data from a separate attitude-rating task, we found that left supramarginal gyrus activity represented participant attitude toward norms and tracked the persuasion-induced attitude changes that were away from agreement. Social norms are the rules governing acceptable behavior within a group 1-3. They regulate individual behavior as internalized beliefs and through external interpersonal sanctions, and they regulate important social phenomena such as cooperation, collective action, and social order 2,4,5. Importantly, norms are not fixed but dynamically changing within a society 3,6. These changes can occur because factors such as the natural environment, group composition, or economic systems fluctuate 7,8. In modern societies, persuasive communication plays an important role in how norms change. While virtually all people agree on some norms such as 'murder is wrong' , agreement with many other norms varies person to person. When questioning a norm gains significant traction within a society, proponents and critics often attempt to sway others to their respective positions with personal dialog, through television, and over the internet 2,6,9,10. Indeed, verbal persuasion has been a factor in the abolition of racial segregation through the civil-rights movement, new attitudes against public smoking, and the ongoing changes across some parts of the world with regard to same-sex marriage 7,11,12. How much people agree with a norm can be influenced by persuasion, and this process is critical to group-level reinforcement/emergence or weakening/abolition of norms. Recent studies in social science have begun to investigate how this process unfolds in the context of communication in social networks 7,13 , but a biological explanation at the individual brain level is still lacking. Recent studies have assessed various norm-related cognitive processes and clarified their neural correlates. Norm compliance/adaptation has been associated with the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dLPFC), ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vMPFC), and insula 14-16. Moral judgment has been associated with the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dMPFC), posterior cingulate cortex, the temporo-parietal junction (TPJ), vMPFC, and the striatum 17-19. Additionally, recognition of social equality has been associated with the activity in the vMPFC, striatum, and insula 20,21. However, these studies presupposed fixed norms/moral-standards, and therefore did not assess how norms themselves 'change'. Other recent studies have assessed the neural basis of persuasion in the context of product advertisement or health promotion 22-27. These studies showed that the dMPFC, vMPFC, inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) and dLPFC play a pivotal role in attitude change through persuasion. However, social norms were not targeted, and whether changing attitudes toward social norms requires any additional brain regions is unknown. Thus, neuroscience studies of social norms have never assessed how norms change, while those of persuasion-induced attitude change have not targeted norms.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Bioinformatics
  • Ingroup Bias

    • Cited by

    Neuroscience and the Social Origins of Moral Behavior: How Neural Underpinnings of Social Categorization and Conformity Affect Everyday Moral and Immoral Behavior
    Naomi Ellemers

    Current Directions in Psychological Science

    Neuroscientific evidence identifies the brain networks and cognitive processes involved in people’s thoughts and feelings about their behavior. This helps individuals understand the judgments and decisions they make with regard to their own and others’ moral and immoral behavior. This article complements prior reviews by focusing on the social origins of everyday moral and immoral behavior and reviewing neuroscientific research findings related to social conformity, categorization, and identification to demonstrate (a) when people are motivated by social norms of others to follow particular moral guidelines, (b) what prevents people from considering the moral implications of their actions for others, and (c) how people process feedback they receive from others about the appropriateness of their behavior. Revealing the neural mechanisms involved in the social processes that influence the moral and immoral behaviors people display helps researchers understand why and when different ty...

    View PDFchevron_right
    Assessing and correcting for regression toward the mean in deviance-induced social conformity
    Henning Gibbons

    Frontiers in Psychology, 2015

    Our understanding of the mechanisms underlying social conformity has recently advanced due to the employment of neuroscience methodology and novel experimental approaches. Most prominently, several studies have demonstrated the role of neural reinforcement-learning processes in conformal adjustments using a specifically designed and frequently replicated paradigm. Only very recently, the validity of the critical behavioral effect in this very paradigm was seriously questioned, as it invites the unwanted contribution of regression toward the mean. Using a straightforward control-group design, we corroborate this recent finding and demonstrate the involvement of statistical distortions. Additionally, however, we provide conclusive evidence that the paradigm nevertheless captures behavioral effects that can only be attributed to social influence. Finally, we present a mathematical approach that allows to isolate and quantify the paradigm's true conformity effect both at the group level and for each individual participant. These data as well as relevant theoretical considerations suggest that the groundbreaking findings regarding the brain mechanisms of social conformity that were obtained with this recently criticized paradigm were indeed valid. Moreover, we support earlier suggestions that distorted behavioral effects can be rectified by means of appropriate correction procedures.

    View PDFchevron_right
    Social proof in the human brain: Electrophysiological signatures of agreement and disagreement with the majority
    Henning Gibbons

    Psychophysiology, 2015

    Perceiving one's deviance from the majority usually instigates conformal adjustments of one's own behavior to that of the group. Using ERPs, we investigated the mechanisms by which agreeing and disagreeing with the majority are differentially represented in the human brain and affect subsequent cognitive processing. Replicating previous findings obtained in a slightly different paradigm, we found that learning about one's disagreement with the majority, as compared to learning about one's agreement with the majority, elicited a mediofrontal feedback negativity. Moreover, an enhanced posterior late positive complex was observed during the processing of agreement as compared to disagreement. Finally, when the to-be-judged faces were viewed for a second time, a stronger posterior P2 was observed for faces on whose judgment one had previously agreed with the majority than for those on which one had disagreed. We thus demonstrate that the brain places particular emphasis ...

    View PDFchevron_right
    Social Rewards: From Basic Social Building Blocks to Complex Social Behavior
    Brent Hughes

    Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2018

    Humans are social creatures, engaging almost constantly in social behaviors that serve ultimate social goals, such as forming strong bonds with one another. However, most social behaviors provide only incremental progress toward an ultimate goal. Instead, the drive to engage in any individual social act may derive from its proximal value rather than its ultimate goal. Thus, this proximal value forms the foundation on which the complexities of human sociality are built. We describe two complementary approaches for using proximal social rewards to understand social behaviors and their ultimate goals: (a) decontextualizing social rewards—paring down complex social interactions can help identify which basic building blocks remain valuable even in minimalistic contexts—and (b) recontextualizing social rewards—reintroducing motivational and contextual factors into the study of social experience can help identify how proximal rewards serve their ultimate function. We discuss how this dual-...

    View PDFchevron_right
    Consensus-seeking and conflict-resolving ---an fMRI study on college couples’ shopping interaction
    Chun-Chia Kung

    2020

    One of the typical campus scenes is the social interaction between college couples, and the lesson couples must keep learning is to adapt to each other. This fMRI study investigated the shopping interactions of 30 college couples, one lying inside and the other outside the scanner, beholding the same item from two connected PCs, making preference ratings and subsequent buy/not-buy decisions. The behavioral results showed the clear modulation of significant others’ preferences onto one’s own decisions, and the contrast of the “shop-together vs. shop-alone”, and the “congruent (both liked or disliked the item, 68%) vs. incongruent (one liked but the other disliked, and vice versa)” together trials, both revealed bilateral temporal parietal junction (TPJ) among other reward-related regions, likely reflecting mentalizing during preference harmony. Moreover, when contrasting “own-high/other-low vs. own-low/other-high” incongruent trials, left anterior inferior parietal lobule (l-aIPL) wa...

    View PDFchevron_right
    580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved