Literature DB >> 27605616

Parsing the Behavioral and Brain Mechanisms of Third-Party Punishment.

Matthew R Ginther1, Richard J Bonnie2, Morris B Hoffman3, Francis X Shen4, Kenneth W Simons5, Owen D Jones6, René Marois7.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: The evolved capacity for third-party punishment is considered crucial to the emergence and maintenance of elaborate human social organization and is central to the modern provision of fairness and justice within society. Although it is well established that the mental state of the offender and the severity of the harm he caused are the two primary predictors of punishment decisions, the precise cognitive and brain mechanisms by which these distinct components are evaluated and integrated into a punishment decision are poorly understood. Using fMRI, here we implement a novel experimental design to functionally dissociate the mechanisms underlying evaluation, integration, and decision that were conflated in previous studies of third-party punishment. Behaviorally, the punishment decision is primarily defined by a superadditive interaction between harm and mental state, with subjects weighing the interaction factor more than the single factors of harm and mental state. On a neural level, evaluation of harms engaged brain areas associated with affective and somatosensory processing, whereas mental state evaluation primarily recruited circuitry involved in mentalization. Harm and mental state evaluations are integrated in medial prefrontal and posterior cingulate structures, with the amygdala acting as a pivotal hub of the interaction between harm and mental state. This integrated information is used by the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex at the time of the decision to assign an appropriate punishment through a distributed coding system. Together, these findings provide a blueprint of the brain mechanisms by which neutral third parties render punishment decisions. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Punishment undergirds large-scale cooperation and helps dispense criminal justice. Yet it is currently unknown precisely how people assess the mental states of offenders, evaluate the harms they caused, and integrate those two components into a single punishment decision. Using a new design, we isolated these three processes, identifying the distinct brain systems and activities that enable each. Additional findings suggest that the amygdala plays a crucial role in mediating the interaction of mental state and harm information, whereas the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex plays a crucial, final-stage role, both in integrating mental state and harm information and in selecting a suitable punishment amount. These findings deepen our understanding of how punishment decisions are made, which may someday help to improve them.
Copyright © 2016 Ginther et al.

Entities:  

Keywords:  decision-making; fMRI; harm; law; mental state; punishment

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27605616      PMCID: PMC5013189          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4499-15.2016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosci        ISSN: 0270-6474            Impact factor:   6.167


  52 in total

1.  The neural basis of economic decision-making in the Ultimatum Game.

Authors:  Alan G Sanfey; James K Rilling; Jessica A Aronson; Leigh E Nystrom; Jonathan D Cohen
Journal:  Science       Date:  2003-06-13       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Functional specializations in lateral prefrontal cortex associated with the integration and segregation of information in working memory.

Authors:  Nicola De Pisapia; Jessica A Slomski; Todd S Braver
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2006-06-12       Impact factor: 5.357

Review 3.  Are there theory of mind regions in the brain? A review of the neuroimaging literature.

Authors:  Sarah J Carrington; Anthony J Bailey
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 5.038

4.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

5.  Punishment sustains large-scale cooperation in prestate warfare.

Authors:  Sarah Mathew; Robert Boyd
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-06-13       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Empathic choice involves vmPFC value signals that are modulated by social processing implemented in IPL.

Authors:  Vanessa Janowski; Colin Camerer; Antonio Rangel
Journal:  Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci       Date:  2012-02-20       Impact factor: 3.436

7.  Diminishing reciprocal fairness by disrupting the right prefrontal cortex.

Authors:  Daria Knoch; Alvaro Pascual-Leone; Kaspar Meyer; Valerie Treyer; Ernst Fehr
Journal:  Science       Date:  2006-10-05       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Functional imaging of 'theory of mind'

Authors:  Helen L. Gallagher; Christopher D. Frith
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 20.229

9.  From Blame to Punishment: Disrupting Prefrontal Cortex Activity Reveals Norm Enforcement Mechanisms.

Authors:  Joshua W Buckholtz; Justin W Martin; Michael T Treadway; Katherine Jan; David H Zald; Owen Jones; René Marois
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2015-09-16       Impact factor: 17.173

10.  Identification and classification of hubs in brain networks.

Authors:  Olaf Sporns; Christopher J Honey; Rolf Kötter
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2007-10-17       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  15 in total

1.  Cognitive and neural bases of decision-making causing civilian casualties during intergroup conflict.

Authors:  Xiaochun Han; Shuai Zhou; Nardine Fahoum; Taoyu Wu; Tianyu Gao; Simone Shamay-Tsoory; Michele J Gelfand; Xinhuai Wu; Shihui Han
Journal:  Nat Hum Behav       Date:  2021-03-08

2.  Cerebral responses to self-initiated action during social interactions.

Authors:  Wuyi Wang; Simon Zhornitsky; Clara S-P Li; Sheng Zhang; Jaime S Ide; Jutta Joormann; Chiang-Shan R Li
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 3.282

3.  An fMRI investigation of the intention-outcome interactions in second- and third-party punishment.

Authors:  Chunliang Feng; Qun Yang; Lydia Azem; Konstantina M Atanasova; Ruolei Gu; Wenbo Luo; Morris Hoffman; Stefanie Lis; Frank Krueger
Journal:  Brain Imaging Behav       Date:  2021-09-17       Impact factor: 3.978

4.  To Blame or Not? Modulating Third-Party Punishment with the Framing Effect.

Authors:  Jiamiao Yang; Ruolei Gu; Jie Liu; Kexin Deng; Xiaoxuan Huang; Yue-Jia Luo; Fang Cui
Journal:  Neurosci Bull       Date:  2022-01-06       Impact factor: 5.271

5.  Intrinsic functional connectivity of the frontoparietal network predicts inter-individual differences in the propensity for costly third-party punishment.

Authors:  Qun Yang; Gabriele Bellucci; Morris Hoffman; Ko-Tsung Hsu; Bonian Lu; Gopikrishna Deshpande; Frank Krueger
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2021-07-30       Impact factor: 3.282

6.  Prefrontal-Amygdala Connectivity and State Anxiety during Fear Extinction Recall in Adolescents.

Authors:  Despina E Ganella; Marjolein E A Barendse; Jee H Kim; Sarah Whittle
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2017-12-04       Impact factor: 3.169

7.  Extinction of Conditioned Fear in Adolescents and Adults: A Human fMRI Study.

Authors:  Despina E Ganella; Katherine D Drummond; Eleni P Ganella; Sarah Whittle; Jee Hyun Kim
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2018-01-08       Impact factor: 3.169

8.  The behavioral and neural basis of empathic blame.

Authors:  Indrajeet Patil; Marta Calò; Federico Fornasier; Fiery Cushman; Giorgia Silani
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-07-12       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Commentary: Parsing the Behavioral and Brain Mechanisms of Third-Party Punishment.

Authors:  Anne-Marie Nußberger; Mary Montgomery; Yingyi Luo; Hongbo Yu
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2017-06-29       Impact factor: 4.677

10.  Reasoning supports forgiving accidental harms.

Authors:  Indrajeet Patil; Bastien Trémolière
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-07-13       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.