| Literature DB >> 25836972 |
Motoki Watabe1, Takahiro A Kato2, Alan R Teo3, Hideki Horikawa4, Masaru Tateno5, Kohei Hayakawa4, Norihiro Shimokawa4, Shigenobu Kanba4.
Abstract
Maladaptive social interaction and its related psychopathology have been highlighted in psychiatry especially among younger generations. In Japan, novel expressive forms of psychiatric phenomena such as "modern-type depression" and "hikikomori" (a syndrome of severe social withdrawal lasting for at least six months) have been reported especially among young people. Economic games such as the trust game have been utilized to evaluate real-world interpersonal relationships as a novel candidate for psychiatric evaluations. To investigate the relationship between trusting behaviors and various psychometric scales, we conducted a trust game experiment with eighty-one Japanese university students as a pilot study. Participants made a risky financial decision about whether to trust each of 40 photographed partners. Participants then answered a set of questionnaires with seven scales including the Lubben Social Network Scale (LSNS)-6 and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ)-9. Consistent with previous research, male participants trusted partners more than female participants. Regression analysis revealed that LSNS-family (perceived support from family) for male participants, and item 8 of PHQ-9 (subjective agitation and/or retardation) for female participants were associated with participants' trusting behaviors. Consistent with claims by social scientists, our data suggest that, for males, support from family was negatively associated with cooperative behavior toward non-family members. Females with higher subjective agitation (and/or retardation) gave less money toward males and high attractive females, but not toward low attractive females in interpersonal relationships. We believe that our data indicate the possible impact of economic games in psychiatric research and clinical practice, and validation in clinical samples including modern-type depression and hikikomori should be investigated.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25836972 PMCID: PMC4383339 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0120183
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Trust Game Structure with the Most Extreme Cases.
Mean Ratio and SD of "Monetary Scores"(how much money given) and "Trusting Rates".
| Photographed Male Partner | Photographed Female Partner | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High Attractiveness | Low Attractiveness | High Attractiveness | Low Attractiveness | ||
|
|
| .292 (.196) | .361(.188) | .325 (.187) | .302 (.199) |
|
| 3.38 (1.38) | 3.62(1.48) | 3.52 (1.24) | 3.43 (1.37) | |
|
|
| .340 (.224) | .361 (.205) | .358 (.202) | .337 (.222) |
|
| 3.63 (1.42) | 3.86 (1.63) | 3.54 (1.33) | 3.60 (1.51) | |
|
|
| .237 (.142) | .265 (.153) | .287 (.164) | .262 (.163) |
|
| 3.09 (1.30) | 3.37 (1.26) | 3.51 (1.13) | 3.26 (1.17) | |
Fig 2The ratio of monetary score given by partner’s sex and attractiveness (** p<.01).
Fig 3The ratio of trusting rates toward partner’s sex and attractiveness (*p<.05).
Results of Regression Analysis (Monetary Scores as Dependent Variable).
| Photographed Male Partner | Photographed Female Partner | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Independent Variable | High Attractiveness | Low Attractiveness | High Attractiveness | Low Attractiveness |
| Beta | Beta | Beta | Beta | |
|
| .617 | .700 | .587 | .642 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note:
* p<.05,
** p<.01.
Eleven participants were excluded in this analysis for failing to complete the questions.
Results of Regression Analysis with Stepwise option (Monetary Scores as Dependent Variable).
| Photographed Male Partner | Photographed Female Partner | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Independent Variable | High Attractiveness | Low Attractiveness | High Attractiveness | Low Attractiveness | |
| Beta | Beta | Beta | Beta | ||
|
|
| .536 | .720 | .541 | .588 |
|
| -.326 | -.230 | -.316 | -.324 | |
|
| - | - | .274 | .246 | |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| .675 | .619 | .625 | .594 |
|
| -.318 | -.314 | -.308 | - | |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Note:
* p<.05,
** p<.01.
Eight male participants and five female participants with incomplete data were excluded in this analysis.