Influenced by self-interest, humans less concerned about inequity to others

brain
White matter fiber architecture of the brain. Credit: Human Connectome Project.

Strongly influenced by their self-interest, humans do not protest being overcompensated, even when there are no consequences, researchers in Georgia State University's Brains and Behavior Program have found.

This could imply that humans are less concerned than previously believed about the inequity of others, researchers said. Their findings are published in the journal Brain Connectivity. These findings suggest humans' sense of unfairness is affected by their self-interest, indicating the interest humans show in others' outcomes is a recently evolved propensity.

It has long been known that humans show sensitivity when they are at a disadvantage by refusing or protesting outcomes more often when they are offered less money than a social partner. But the research team of physics graduate students Bidhan Lamichhane and Bhim Adhikari and Brains and Behavior faculty Dr. Sarah Brosnan, associate professor of psychology, and Dr. Mukesh Dhamala, associate professor of physics and astronomy, reports that, contrary to expectations, humans do not show any sensitivity when they are overcompensated. They conclude that humans are more interested in their own outcomes than those of others.

"A true sense of fairness means that I get upset if I get paid more than you because I don't think that's fair," Brosnan said. "We thought that people would quite a bit in the fixed decision game because it's a cost-free way to say, 'This isn't fair.' But that's not what we saw at all. People protested higher offers at roughly the same rate that they refused offers where they got more, indicating that this lack of refusal in advantaged situations may not be because of the cost of refusing. It may just be because people don't care as much as we thought they did if they're getting more than someone else."

The researchers also used functional (fMRI) to study the underlying mechanisms from 18 participants, who played three two-person economic exchange games that involved inequity in their favor and not in their favor. Overcompensated offers triggered a different brain circuit than undercompensated offers and indicate that people may be responding to overcompensation as if it were a reward. This could explain the lack of refusals in this unfair situation, researchers said.

Each game involved three offers for how $100 would be split: fair (amount between $40 to $60), unfair-low (disadvantageous to the subject, amount between $0 to $20) and unfair-overcompensated (advantageous to the subject, amount between $80 to $100). Participants played 30 rounds of each game and earned about two percent of the total amount from the games.

In the first two games, the subject received an offer for how much money they would receive and were then asked whether they wanted to reject or accept it. In the Ultimatum Game, if the responder rejected the offer, neither player received any money, leading to a fair outcome. In the Impunity Game, if the subject rejected the offer, only he or she lost the payoff, meaning the outcome was even more unfair than the offer. The subject got nothing, but the partner still got their proposed amount. In the Fixed Decision Game, the subject could choose to protest or not protest the offers, but this didn't change the outcome for either player. This allowed subjects to protest offers without an associated cost.

The blood-oxygen level dependent signals of the brain were recorded by an MRI scanner as participants played the games. The results of brain response provided new insights into the functional role of the and related networks of brain regions for advantageous inequity and protest.

A network of brain regions consisting of the left caudate, right cingulate and right thalamus had a higher level of activity for overcompensated offers than for fair offers. For protest, a different network, consisting of the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, left ventrolateral prefrontal cortex and left substantia nigra, came into play. The researchers also mapped out how the brain activity flow occurred within these networks during decision-making.

More information: The study, "The Neural Basis of Perceived Unfairness in Economic Exchanges," is available online at online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/… 1089/brain.2014.0243

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

The dark side of fair play

Mar 07, 2014

We often think of playing fair as an altruistic behavior. We're sacrificing our own potential gain to give others what they deserve. What could be more selfless than that? But new research from Northeastern University assistant ...

Self-centered kids? Blame their immature brains

Mar 07, 2012

A new study suggests that age-associated improvements in the ability to consider the preferences of others are linked with maturation of a brain region involved in self control. The findings, published by Cell Press in the ...

Sense of justice built into the brain

May 03, 2011

A new study from the Karolinska Institute and Stockholm School of Economics shows that the brain has built-in mechanisms that trigger an automatic reaction to someone who refuses to share. In the study publishing next week ...

Recommended for you

Neurons express 'gloss' using three perceptual parameters

13 hours ago

Japanese researchers showed monkeys a number of images representing various glosses and then they measured the responses of 39 neurons by using microelectrodes. They found that a specific population of neurons ...

Scientists show rise and fall of brain volume

16 hours ago

(Medical Xpress)—We can witness our bodies mature, then gradually grow wrinkled and weaker with age, but it is only recently that scientists have been able to track a similar progression in the nerve bundles ...

User comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

RobertKarlStonjek
1 / 5 (1) Aug 21, 2014
This sounds very much like the behaviour of American college students.

Hardly surprising, then, to find that this the cohort being tested. The results apply only to American college students playing games and should not be generalised beyond that very narrow study.

People mature after leaving college. Americans are known to be more individualistic and self centred than people in other modern western countries. And game theory, when tested on tribal people who had little contact with the west and no experience playing games of any kind responded completely differently to games like the Ultimatum game when tested a few years ago.

See the paper:
'Economic Man' in Cross-cultural Perspective: Behavioral Experiments in 15 Small-scale Societies
http://www.sscnet...inal.pdf

"We found, first, that the canonical selfishness-based model fails in all of the societies studied."