Influence of social distance and promise levels on trust decisions: An ERPs study

被引:3
|
作者
Li Mei [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Li Jin [2 ,3 ]
Zhang Guanfei [2 ,3 ]
Zhong Yiping [2 ,3 ]
Li Hong [1 ]
机构
[1] South China Normal Univ, Sch Psychol, Guangzhou 510631, Peoples R China
[2] Hunan Normal Univ, Dept Psychol, Changsha 410081, Peoples R China
[3] Cognit & Human Behav Key Lab Hunan Prov, Changsha 410081, Peoples R China
关键词
promise levels; social distance; trust behavior; rational signal theory; event-related potentials (ERPs); NEURAL CIRCUITRY; STRANGERS; BIAS; RECIPROCITY; BEHAVIORS; COMPONENT;
D O I
10.3724/SP.J.1041.2023.01859
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Previous research has revealed that trust plays an important role in promoting functioning, economic growth, and individual well-being in human society. Trust refers to individuals' willingness to take risks to hand over their resources to others in the context of social uncertainty. Based on rational signal theory, individuals tend to make social decisions (e.g. trust) according to perceived social information of others, such as social identity, gestures, language, and behaviors. Among these, trustees' social identity and their promises are important social information that convey whether an individual is trustworthy and reliable. Previous research has only examined the effect of promise levels on trust decisions, or the effect social distance on trust decisions. However, little is known about how promise levels and social distance interact to affect trust behaviors and its neural mechanisms. We adapted a Trust Game (TG) and the event-related potentials (ERPs) to examine the neurocognitive mechanisms of the effect of promise levels and social distance on trust behaviors. In particular, participates were asked to choose whether to trust their friends and strangers when they made high and low-level promises while electroencephalograms (EEGs) were recorded. Within each round, participants were informed of the promiser and their promise. We adopted two promise levels from previous studies: high-level promises would return 28 yuan (70%), and low- level 12 yuan (30%). The social distance includes both friend and stranger levels. The experiment consisted of 600 trials, including 150 trials for each condition. The behavioral results indicated that when the promiser was a friend, participants were more likely to invest and this was not affected by promise levels. However, when the promiser was a stranger, participants were more likely to invest when they were informed of low-level promises than high-level promises. The ERP results showed that the P2 was larger for the high-level promises than for the low- level promises. More importantly, when the promiser was a stranger, the N2 was more negative when they were informed of low-level promises than high-level promises. Conversely, the P3 was larger when they were informed of high-level promises than low-level promises. However, when the promiser was a friend, the N2 and P3 amplitudes had no difference. These results suggest that motivations of trusting behaviors toward friends and strangers are driven by different psychological mechanisms. Individuals trust friends more, and when the promiser is a friend, individuals can be motivated by the mutual interests of self and friends when making trust choices. However, when the promiser is a stranger, individuals are only driven by self-interest, and they do not care about strangers' benefits when making trust choices. The present study provides insight into how the brain processes the interplay of social distance and promise levels on trust decisions, which broadens the previous insight into understanding trust behaviors.
引用
收藏
页码:1859 / 1871
页数:13
相关论文
共 72 条
  • [1] What you don't know won't hurt you: a laboratory analysis of betrayal aversion
    Aimone, Jason A.
    Houser, Daniel
    [J]. EXPERIMENTAL ECONOMICS, 2012, 15 (04) : 571 - 588
  • [2] INCLUSION OF OTHER IN THE SELF SCALE AND THE STRUCTURE OF INTERPERSONAL CLOSENESS
    ARON, A
    ARON, EN
    SMOLLAN, D
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1992, 63 (04) : 596 - 612
  • [3] Bacharach M., 2001, TRUST SOC, P148
  • [4] Attentional bias in anxiety: A behavioral and ERP study
    Bar-Haim, Y
    Lamy, D
    Glickman, S
    [J]. BRAIN AND COGNITION, 2005, 59 (01) : 11 - 22
  • [5] Oxytocin shapes the neural circuitry of trust and trust adaptation in humans
    Baumgartner, Thomas
    Heinrichs, Markus
    Vonlanthen, Aline
    Fischbacher, Urs
    Fehr, Ernst
    [J]. NEURON, 2008, 58 (04) : 639 - 650
  • [6] The Neural Circuitry of a Broken Promise
    Baumgartner, Thomas
    Fischbacher, Urs
    Feierabend, Anja
    Lutz, Kai
    Fehr, Ernst
    [J]. NEURON, 2009, 64 (05) : 756 - 770
  • [7] TRUST, RECIPROCITY, AND SOCIAL-HISTORY
    BERG, J
    DICKHAUT, J
    MCCABE, K
    [J]. GAMES AND ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR, 1995, 10 (01) : 122 - 142
  • [8] Social distance and trust: Experimental evidence from a slum in Cairo
    Binzel, Christine
    Fehr, Dietmar
    [J]. JOURNAL OF DEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS, 2013, 103 : 99 - 106
  • [9] Higher Status Honesty Is Worth More: The Effect of Social Status on Honesty Evaluation
    Blue, Philip R.
    Hu, Jie
    Zhou, Xiaolin
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2018, 9
  • [10] Social distance and other-regarding behavior in dictator games: Comment
    Bohnet, I
    Frey, BS
    [J]. AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 1999, 89 (01): : 335 - 339