Abstract
It has now become widely accepted that economic decisions are influenced by cognitive and emotional processes. In the present study, we aimed at disentangling the neural mechanisms associated with the way in which the information is formulated, i.e., framing effect, in terms of gain or loss, which influences people's decisions. Participants played a fMRI version of the Ultimatum Game (UG) where we manipulated bids through two different frames: the expression “I give you” (gain) focusing on money the respondent would receive if she/he agreed with the proponent, and the expression “I take” (loss) focusing on the money that would be removed from the respondent in the event that she/he accepted the offer. Neuroimaging data revealed a frame by response interaction, showing an increase of neural activity in the right rolandic operculum/insular cortex, the anterior cingulate, among other regions, for accepting the frame “I take” vs. rejecting, as compared to accepting the frame “I give you” vs. rejecting. In addition, the left occipito-temporal junction was activated for “I take” vs. “I give you” for offer 5, corresponding to the equal offer made unpleasant by the presence of the frame “I take,” where is the proposer that takes the money. Our data extend the current understanding of the neural substrates of social decision making, by disentangling the structures sensitive to the way in which the information is formulated (i.e., framing effect), in terms of gain or loss.
Highlights
Cross-field research in experimental economics and cognitive psychology has clearly demonstrated how both the cognitive and emotional processes may influence economical decision-making (Bechara et al, 1997; Sanfey et al, 2003; Naqvi et al, 2006)
Participants played a fMRI version of the Ultimatum Game (UG) where we manipulated bids through two different frames: the expression “I give you” focusing on money the respondent would receive if she/he agreed with the proponent, and the expression “I take” focusing on the money that would be removed from the respondent in the event that she/he accepted the offer
In a previous psychophysiological study (Sarlo et al, 2012), some of us used a modified version of the UG in which bids were manipulated through two different frames: the expression “I give you” was considered as a gain frame, since it focuses on money the respondent would receive if she agreed with the proponent; on the contrary, the expression “I take” was considered to frame the losses, since it is focused on the money that would be removed from the respondent in the event that she accepted the offer
Summary
Cross-field research in experimental economics and cognitive psychology has clearly demonstrated how both the cognitive and emotional processes may influence economical decision-making (Bechara et al, 1997; Sanfey et al, 2003; Naqvi et al, 2006). These studies unveiled the limits of the theory of rationality proposed by von Neumann and Morgenstern (1947). The second account focuses on intentions, and claims that people reject unfair offers in order to punish the socially unacceptable behavior of the proposer. From a psychological point of view, negative emotions, such as frustration, have been proposed as being the ultimate cause of the rejections (Pillutla and Murnighan, 1996), and psychophysiological, imaging and neuropsychological evidence supports this interpretation
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
