Abstract

Social decision-making is often complex, requiring the decision-maker to make inferences of others' mental states in addition to engaging traditional decision-making processes like valuation and reward processing. A growing body of research in neuroeconomics has examined decision-making involving social and non-social stimuli to explore activity in brain regions such as the striatum and prefrontal cortex, largely ignoring the power of the social context. Perhaps more complex processes may influence decision-making in social vs. non-social contexts. Years of social psychology and social neuroscience research have documented a multitude of processes (e.g., mental state inferences, impression formation, spontaneous trait inferences) that occur upon viewing another person. These processes rely on a network of brain regions including medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC), superior temporal sulcus (STS), temporal parietal junction, and precuneus among others. Undoubtedly, these social cognition processes affect social decision-making since mental state inferences occur spontaneously and automatically. Few studies have looked at how these social inference processes affect decision-making in a social context despite the capability of these inferences to serve as predictions that can guide future decision-making. Here we review and integrate the person perception and decision-making literatures to understand how social cognition can inform the study of social decision-making in a way that is consistent with both literatures. We identify gaps in both literatures—while behavioral economics largely ignores social processes that spontaneously occur upon viewing another person, social psychology has largely failed to talk about the implications of social cognition processes in an economic decision-making context—and examine the benefits of integrating social psychological theory with behavioral economic theory.

Highlights

  • What makes social decision-making unique and different from non-social decision-making? Humans are highly social animals— as such, researchers often take for granted the ease with which humans make social decisions

  • We identify gaps in both literatures—while behavioral economics largely ignores social processes that spontaneously occur upon viewing another person, social psychology has largely failed to talk about the implications of social cognition processes in an economic decision-making context—and examine the benefits of integrating social psychological theory with behavioral economic theory

  • Whether actual consistency across contexts exists depends on the psychological viewpoint one takes—personality psychologists would suggest traits are an enduring quality that stays consistent across situations, social psychologists stress the importance of the situation and the interaction between person and environment (Lewin, 1951; Ross and Nisbett, 1991). How does this contribute to our discussion of human and computer agents in an economic game? Do participants use the same brain regions when making predictions about what a human will do vs. what a computer will do? Since each type of agent recruits different brain regions, do social predictions rely on the person perception/social cognition network as we hypothesize above? Below we describe three economic games—the trust game, ultimatum game, and prisoner’s dilemma game—often used in the neuroeconomics literature on social decision-making and discuss how social cognition and social psychological theory may be useful when studying these games

Read more

Summary

How social cognition can inform social decision making

Social decision-making should be a complex process—social decision-makers must engage traditional decision-making processes (e.g., learning, valuation, and feedback processing), as well as infer the mental states of another person These two tasks have been separately studied in the fields of behavioral economics and social psychology, with behavioral economists studying decisionmaking in interactive economic games and social psychologists studying spontaneous inferences about other people. We suggest that such differences in decision-making arise due to differences when processing human and computer agents Viewing another person engages the social cognition brain network, allowing for mental state inferences that function as predictions during the decision phase, as well as spontaneous trait inferences that occur when viewing the other person’s behavior in the feedback phase. People form impressions of others at the same time others are forming impressions www.frontiersin.org

Lee and Harris
Random device
Brain regions associated with an effect of human agent
CONCLUSION
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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