Literature DB >> 33203741

Why We Learn Less from Observing Outgroups.

Pyungwon Kang1, Christopher J Burke2, Philippe N Tobler2, Grit Hein3.   

Abstract

Humans are less likely to learn from individuals belonging to a different group (outgroup) than from individuals of their own group (ingroup), yet the source of this societally relevant deficit has remained unclear. Here we used neuroimaging and computational modeling to investigate how people learn from observing the actions and outcomes of ingroup and outgroup demonstrators. Politically left-wing male and female participants performed worse when observing computer-simulated actions they believed were from a right-wing outgroup member compared with those from a left-wing ingroup member. A control experiment in which participants observed choices from a nonhuman agent confirmed that this performance difference reflected an outgroup deficit, rather than an ingroup gain. Accounting for the outgroup deficit, a computational model showed that participants relied less on information from outgroup actions compared with ingroup actions, while learning from outgroup outcomes was not impaired. At the neural level, the differences in observational ingroup versus outgroup learning were reflected in lateral prefrontal activity. The stronger the activity in this region, the more strongly participants weighed ingroup compared with outgroup learning signals (action prediction errors), which formally captured deficits in outgroup learning. Together, our work provides a computational and neural account of why people learn less from observing outgroups.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Learning from observing others is an efficient way to acquire knowledge. In our globalized world, "the others" often are people from a different social group (outgroup). There is evidence that people learn less from observing outgroup individuals compared with individuals from their own group (ingroup). However, the source of this outgroup deficit in observational learning remained unknown, which limits our chances to improve intergroup learning. Our results showed that participants rely less on observed outgroup actions compared with ingroup actions, while learning from outgroup outcomes is not impaired. On the neural level, this outgroup deficit was reflected in the activation of the inferior frontal gyrus. These findings imply that intergroup learning should rely on observing outcomes, rather than actions.
Copyright © 2021 the authors.

Entities:  

Keywords:  fMRI; ingroup; observational reinforcement learning; outgroup; prediction error

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33203741      PMCID: PMC7786220          DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0926-20.2020

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


  23 in total

Review 1.  Common and distinct networks underlying reward valence and processing stages: a meta-analysis of functional neuroimaging studies.

Authors:  Xun Liu; Jacqueline Hairston; Madeleine Schrier; Jin Fan
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2010-12-24       Impact factor: 8.989

2.  Race modulates neural activity during imitation.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Reynolds Losin; Marco Iacoboni; Alia Martin; Katy A Cross; Mirella Dapretto
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2011-10-28       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  The neural origins of superficial and individuated judgments about ingroup and outgroup members.

Authors:  Jonathan B Freeman; Daniela Schiller; Nicholas O Rule; Nalini Ambady
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 5.038

4.  Infants' and young children's imitation of linguistic in-group and out-group informants.

Authors:  Lauren H Howard; Annette M E Henderson; Cristina Carrazza; Amanda L Woodward
Journal:  Child Dev       Date:  2014-09-26

5.  Social learning of fear and safety is determined by the demonstrator's racial group.

Authors:  Armita Golkar; Vasco Castro; Andreas Olsson
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 3.703

6.  Brain regions with mirror properties: a meta-analysis of 125 human fMRI studies.

Authors:  Pascal Molenberghs; Ross Cunnington; Jason B Mattingley
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2011-07-18       Impact factor: 8.989

7.  ALE meta-analysis of action observation and imitation in the human brain.

Authors:  Svenja Caspers; Karl Zilles; Angela R Laird; Simon B Eickhoff
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2010-01-04       Impact factor: 6.556

8.  Selective imitation of in-group over out-group members in 14-month-old infants.

Authors:  David Buttelmann; Norbert Zmyj; Moritz Daum; Malinda Carpenter
Journal:  Child Dev       Date:  2012-09-24

9.  The empirical replicability of task-based fMRI as a function of sample size.

Authors:  Han Bossier; Sanne P Roels; Ruth Seurinck; Tobias Banaschewski; Gareth J Barker; Arun L W Bokde; Erin Burke Quinlan; Sylvane Desrivières; Herta Flor; Antoine Grigis; Hugh Garavan; Penny Gowland; Andreas Heinz; Bernd Ittermann; Jean-Luc Martinot; Eric Artiges; Frauke Nees; Dimitri Papadopoulos Orfanos; Luise Poustka; Juliane H Fröhner Dipl-Psych; Michael N Smolka; Henrik Walter; Robert Whelan; Gunter Schumann; Beatrijs Moerkerke
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2020-02-07       Impact factor: 7.400

10.  Damage to the Ventromedial Prefrontal Cortex Impairs Learning from Observed Outcomes.

Authors:  Dharshan Kumaran; David E Warren; Daniel Tranel
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2015-04-24       Impact factor: 5.357

View more
  2 in total

1.  Learning from Ingroup Experiences Changes Intergroup Impressions.

Authors:  Yuqing Zhou; Björn Lindström; Alexander Soutschek; Pyungwon Kang; Philippe N Tobler; Grit Hein
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2022-07-29       Impact factor: 6.709

2.  Incorporating social knowledge structures into computational models.

Authors:  Koen M M Frolichs; Gabriela Rosenblau; Christoph W Korn
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2022-10-20       Impact factor: 17.694

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.