Psychophysiological correlates of interpersonal cooperation and aggression

• Published in: Biological psychology Vol. 93; no. 3; pp. 386 - 391
• Main Authors: Wang, Yiwen, Roberts, Kathryn, Yuan, Bo, Zhang, Wenxin, Shen, Deli, Simons, Robert
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Amsterdam Elsevier B.V 01.07.2013; Elsevier
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adult; Aggression; Aggression - physiology; Aggression - psychology; Behavioral psychophysiology; Biological and medical sciences; Brain Mapping; Chicken Game; Cooperative Behavior; Electroencephalography; ERPs; Event-Related Potentials, P300 - physiology; Female; FRN; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Game Theory; Humans; Interpersonal Relations; Male; P300; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry; Psychology. Psychophysiology; Reaction Time - physiology; Social decision-making; Young Adult; ERPs; Social decision-making; FRN; P300; Chicken Game; Aggression; Decision making; Electrophysiology; P300 potential; Social decision; Play; Vertebrata; Social interaction; Cooperation; Chicken; Aves; Event evoked potential; Psychophysiology; Interpersonal relation
• ISSN: 0301-0511; 1873-6246
• DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2013.04.008

•Examined outcome evaluation using ERPs after decisions to cooperate or aggress.•dFRN and P300 amplitudes were modulated by the participant's decision strategy.•dFRN suggests that outcome differential between players influences evaluations.•P300 suggests that outcomes of risky decisions or decisions that are favorable are more salient.•Using ERPs with true social dilemma tasks helps to better understand decision-making. Mimicking real world situations, the Chicken Game allows scientists to examine human decision-making when the outcome is not entirely within one person's control. In this social dilemma task, two players independently choose either to safely cooperate with, or riskily aggress against, the other player, and the unique combination of their choices specifies the outcome for each. Coupling the Chicken Game with psychophysiological measures, we confirmed our two hypotheses: that an individual perceives an outcome as most negative when she chooses to cooperate and the other player violates that trust and aggresses, and that motivational salience of an outcome is greater when an individual chooses to aggress and when she gains money. Collectively, the data demonstrate the utility of pairing true social dilemma tasks like the Chicken Game with psychophysiological measures to better understand decision-making.