↓ Skip to main content

Power to Punish Norm Violations Affects the Neural Processes of Fairness-Related Decision Making

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Power to Punish Norm Violations Affects the Neural Processes of Fairness-Related Decision Making
Published in
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, December 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00344
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xuemei Cheng, Li Zheng, Lin Li, Xiuyan Guo, Qianfeng Wang, Anton Lord, Zengxi Hu, Guang Yang

Abstract

Punishing norm violations is considered an important motive during rejection of unfair offers in the ultimatum game (UG). The present study investigates the impact of the power to punish norm violations on people's responses to unfairness and associated neural correlates. In the UG condition participants had the power to punish norm violations, while an alternate condition, the impunity game (IG), was presented where participants had no power to punish norm violations since rejection only reduced the responder's income to zero. Results showed that unfair offers were rejected more often in UG compared to IG. At the neural level, anterior insula and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex were more active when participants received and rejected unfair offers in both UG and IG. Moreover, greater dorsolateral prefrontal cortex activity was observed when participants rejected than accepted unfair offers in UG but not in IG. Ventromedial prefrontal cortex activation was higher in UG than IG when unfair offers were accepted as well as when rejecting unfair offers in IG as opposed to UG. Taken together, our results demonstrate that the power to punish norm violations affects not only people's behavioral responses to unfairness but also the neural correlates of the fairness-related social decision-making process.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Unknown 53 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 15%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 9%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 13 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 31%
Neuroscience 5 9%
Engineering 4 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 18 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 December 2015.
All research outputs
#17,778,101
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#2,413
of 3,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#265,189
of 390,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#72
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,171 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 390,235 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.