| Literature DB >> 31058987 |
Clara Pretus1,2,3, Nafees Hamid1,4, Hammad Sheikh1,5, Ángel Gómez1,6, Jeremy Ginges1,5, Adolf Tobeña1,2, Richard Davis1,7,8, Oscar Vilarroya1,2, Scott Atran1,8,9,10.
Abstract
Willingness to fight and die (WFD) has been developed as a measure to capture willingness to incur costly sacrifices for the sake of a greater cause in the context of entrenched conflict. WFD measures have been repeatedly used in field studies, including studies on the battlefield, although their neurofunctional correlates remain unexplored. Our aim was to identify the neural underpinnings of WFD, focusing on neural activity and interconnectivity of brain areas previously associated with value-based decision-making, such as the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC). A sample of Pakistani participants supporting the Kashmiri cause was selected and invited to participate in an functional magnetic resonance (fMRI) paradigm where they were asked to convey their WFD for a series of values related to Islam and current politics. As predicted, higher compared to lower WFD was associated with increased ventromedial prefrontal activity and decreased dorsolateral activity, as well as lower connectivity between the vmPFC and the dlPFC. Our findings suggest that WFD more prominently relies on brain areas typically associated with subjective value (vmPFC) rather than integration of material costs (dlPFC) during decision-making, supporting the notion that decisions on costly sacrifices may not be mediated by cost-benefit computation.Entities:
Keywords: costly sacrifices; fMRI; functional connectivity; sacred values; will to fight and die
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31058987 PMCID: PMC6688447 DOI: 10.1093/scan/nsz034
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci ISSN: 1749-5016 Impact factor: 3.436
Results of the high vs low WFD contrast thresholded at T = 3.4, P < 0.05 FWE cluster-level corrected, single level P < 0.001
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| High > Low WFD | ||||||
| L ACC | 446 | 4.49 | −4 | 38 | 0 | 0.013 |
| Location not in atlas | 446 | 4.07 | 26 | 38 | 2 | 0.013 |
| L Mid orbital gyrus | 446 | 3.52 | −2 | 62 | −2 | 0.013 |
| Low > high WFD | ||||||
| R Supramarginal gyrus | 1690 | −5.49 | 56 | −32 | 54 | <0.001 |
| R Angular gyrus | 1690 | −3.88 | 40 | −72 | 48 | <0.001 |
| R Middle frontal gyrus | 424 | −5.47 | 48 | 36 | 32 | 0.016 |
| L Superior medial gyrus | 735 | −5.37 | 0 | 24 | 46 | 0.001 |
| L Inferior parietal lobule | 1800 | −5.33 | −54 | −40 | 54 | <0.001 |
| L Inferior parietal lobule | 1800 | −5.05 | −36 | −44 | 46 | <0.001 |
| L Superior parietal lobule | 1800 | −4.54 | −26 | −68 | 62 | <0.001 |
| L IFG (pars triangularis) | 1230 | −5.11 | −40 | 20 | 6 | <0.001 |
| L IFG (pars triangularis) | 1230 | −4.99 | −52 | 14 | 32 | <0.001 |
| L Middle frontal gyrus | 1230 | −3.50 | −44 | 34 | 32 | <0.001 |
Fig. 1Results of the high The high vs low WFD condition yielded higher activity in a cluster including the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and the vmPFC (in red-yellow) and lower activity in the superior medial frontal gyrus, the right middle frontal gyrus, Left inferior frontal gryus (pars triangularis) and bilateral inferior parietal lobule (in blue-green). Results thresholded at T = 3.4. P < 0.05 FWEc. single level P < 0.001. (B) Parameter estimates of vmPFC activity were higher in the high WFD vs baseline condition compared to the low WFD vs baseline condition (t(28) = 3.25. P = 0.003), while those of the bilateral dlPFC were lower (left dlPFC: t(28) = 2.19. P = 0.037; right dlPFC: t(28) = 3.00. P = 0.006) in the same contrast. (C) Between-conditions difference in WFD ratings correlated with between-conditions left dlPFC (r = −0.578, P = 0.001) and right dlPFC (r = −0.456, P = 0.013), but not with vmPFC activity difference, after Bonferroni correction for three tests (one per ROI).
Fig. 2Correlations between neural activity and identity fusion measures. (A) Surface projection of the left middle frontal gryus activity predicted by fusion with Islam and the Muslim Ummah in the high WFD vs baseline contrast (T = 5.01, k = 489, P = 0.024 FWEc) and in the high vs low WFD contrast (T = 4.38, k = 71, P = 0.045 FWEc after small volume correction with the left dlPFC ROI). (B) Scatterplot of the correlation between the fusion score and left middle frontal gryus parameter estimates found in the high WFD vs baseline contrast (r = −0.659, P < 0.001) and the high vs low WFD contrast (r = −.627, P < 0.001). (C) Results table of the second-level GLM using identity fusion with Islam and the Muslim Ummah as predictor of brain activity in the high and low WFD vs baseline contrasts, respectively, and the high WFD vs low WFD contrast.
Fig. 3Effective connectivity analysis results. (A) Parameter estimates of the high WFD effects (dark red) and the low WFD effects (light red) on the effective connectivity between each pair of ROIs including the left and right dlPFC and the vmPFC (‘[seed region]–[target region]’). (B) 3D display of the effective connectivity differences between the high and low WFD conditions after FWE seed-level correction (left lateral and superior view). (C) Effective connectivity results table comparing high > low WFD including a negative correlation between the vmPFC as a seed region and the bilateral dlPFC; no significant results were found in the reverse contrast (low > high WFD).