Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

2 results

  • Chapter 6 - Trust and Emotion

  • from Part II - Neuropsychological Level of Trust
  • Edited by Frank Krueger, George Mason University, Virginia
  • Book:
    The Neurobiology of Trust
    Published online:
    09 December 2021
    Print publication:
    16 December 2021, pp 124-154

  • Summary

    We review research investigating the influences of affective states on trust. To delineate the behavioral and neural effects of emotions on trust decisions, we consider research from Economics, Psychology and Neuroeconomics. We focus on behavioral and neural research that examined the impact of moods and emotions experienced at the moment of choice, and critically examine evidence concerning both positive and negative incidental and integral emotions. Overall, a pattern emerges from previous findings that strongly suggests that both incidental and integral emotions can influence decisions to trust. Specifically, positive incidental emotions, such as happiness, can enhance trust while negative incidental emotions, such as anxiety, reduce trust. At the same time, neuroimaging findings suggest that this behavioral effect is paralleled by emotions having specific effects on decision-relevant neural circuitry. Emotions alter activity during trust decisions in the temporoparietal junction and medial prefrontal cortex, which have been implicated in theory of mind, as well as the anterior insula, which is commonly implicated in anticipatory negative affect. We conclude by pointing at important avenues of research regarding the role of emotions in learning to trust from past experiences, as well as the chronic distortions of affect and social behavior commonly observed in psychopathology.

  • The right temporoparietal junction and cooperation dilemma

  • S. Tei, J. Fujino
  • Journal:
    European Psychiatry / Volume 64 / Issue S1 / April 2021
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    13 August 2021, p. S737
    • Article
      • You have access
      • Open access
    • PDF
    • Export citation
  • Introduction

    Cooperation is a key component of our lives. When we identify people in need, we are frequently motivated to cooperate by overcoming selfishness. However, we may also become selfish to pursue greater gains by putting ourselves at risk and exploiting others. Such cooperation dilemmas are ubiquitous in real life. Although functional magnetic resonance imaging studies have repeatedly reported the involvement of right temporoparietal junction (rTPJ) in cooperation dilemmas, a causal link between the two has been rarely explored.

    Objectives

    To investigate a causal role of rTPJ in resolving cooperation dilemmas in ecologically valid settings.

    Methods

    Twenty-two healthy volunteers were examined. We combined repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) with a snowdrift cooperation dilemma game task (cross-the-traffic intersection version) wherein either cooperation or defection should be chosen. Participants and opponents jointly faced a problem at the intersection where their cooperation could diffuse the situation (stopping/avoiding a car-crash). This conflicted with a choice in the participant’s self-interest which was more rewarding, but risky (not stopping/defection). We also included explicit-cue condition that showed elderly/pregnant passengers in the opponent’s car. Furthermore, we measured participants’ empathic-traits (e.g., perspective-taking) to study personality-cooperation associations.

    Results

    The cooperation-ratio did not statistically differ between the sham stimulation and inhibitory continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) in both the no-cue and with-cue conditions. However, after cTBS, only in the no-cue condition, the strength of the relationship between cooperation-ratios and empathic-traits decreased significantly (p<0.05).

    Conclusions

    These results contribute to our understandings of rTPJ’s role in spontaneous social cognition, which may be considerably complex and require further examination.

    Disclosure

    No significant relationships.