Getting to know you: Reputation and trust in a two-person economic exchange

Human Neuroimaging Laboratory, Department of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine, One Baylor Plaza, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Science (Impact Factor: 31.48). 05/2005; 308(5718):78-83. DOI: 10.1126/science.1108062
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Using a multiround version of an economic exchange (trust game), we report that reciprocity expressed by one player strongly predicts future trust expressed by their partner-a behavioral finding mirrored by neural responses in the dorsal striatum. Here, analyses within and between brains revealed two signals-one encoded by response magnitude, and the other by response timing. Response magnitude correlated with the "intention to trust" on the next play of the game, and the peak of these "intention to trust" responses shifted its time of occurrence by 14 seconds as player reputations developed. This temporal transfer resembles a similar shift of reward prediction errors common to reinforcement learning models, but in the context of a social exchange. These data extend previous model-based functional magnetic resonance imaging studies into the social domain and broaden our view of the spectrum of functions implemented by the dorsal striatum.

1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In a sequential-move, finitely repeated prisoners’ dilemma game (FRPD), cooperation can be sustained if the first-mover believes her opponent might be a behavioral type who plays a tit-for-tat strategy in every period. We test this theory by revealing second-mover histories from an earlier FRPD experiment to their current opponent. Despite eliminating the possibility of reputation-building, aggregate cooperation actually increases when histories are revealed. Cooperative histories lead to increased trust, but negative histories do not cause decreased trust. We develop a behavioral model to explain these findings.
    Economic Theory 04/2015; 58(3). DOI:10.1007/s00199-015-0863-1 · 0.66 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Reciprocal trust is a crucial component of cooperative, mutually beneficial social relationships. Previous research using tasks that require judging and developing interpersonal trust has suggested that the insula may be an important brain region underlying these processes (King-Casas et al., 2008). Here, using a neuropsychological approach, we investigated the role of the insula in reciprocal trust during the Trust Game (TG), an interpersonal economic exchange. Consistent with previous research, we found that neurologically normal adults reciprocate trust in kind, i.e., they increase trust in response to increases from their partners, and decrease trust in response to decreases. In contrast, individuals with damage to the insula displayed abnormal expressions of trust. Specifically, these individuals behaved benevolently (expressing misplaced trust) when playing the role of investor, and malevolently (violating their partner's trust) when playing the role of the trustee. Our findings lend further support to the idea that the insula is important for expressing normal interpersonal trust, perhaps because the insula helps to recognize risk during decision-making and to identify social norm violations. Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
    Neuropsychologia 04/2015; 281. DOI:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2015.04.003 · 3.45 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite the risks, people enjoy giving advice. One explanation is that giving beneficial advice can result in reflected glory, ego boosts or reputation enhancement. However, giving poor advice can be socially harmful (being perceived as incompetent or untrustworthy). In both circumstances, we have a vested interest in the advice-follower's success or failure, especially when it reflects specifically on us compared to when it is diffused between multiple advisors. We examined these dynamics using an Advisor-Advisee Game, where subjects acted as an Advisor to a confederate Advisee who selected one of three options when trying to win money: accept the subject's advice, accept the advice of a second confederate Advisor, or accept both Advisors' advice. Results showed that having one's advice accepted, compared to being rejected, resulted in activity in the ventral striatum - a core reward area. Furthermore, the ventral striatum was only active when the subject's advice led to the advisee winning, and not when the advisee won based on the confederate's advice. Finally, the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC) was more active when the Advisee won or lost money based solely on the subject's advice compared to when the second Advisor's advice was accepted. One explanation for these findings is that the MPFC monitors self-relevant social information, while the ventral striatum is active when others accept advice and when their success leads to reflected glory. © The Author (2015). Published by Oxford University Press. For Permissions, please email:
    Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 02/2015; DOI:10.1093/scan/nsv020 · 5.88 Impact Factor