Interpersonal Decisions Flashcards

1
Q

Explain Ultimatum game?

A

Responder and proposer. Pot of money. PRoposer makes offer.
Responder accepts split = both keep share of money agreed
Rejects = neither get any.
One shot game

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What finding is common in ultiamtum game?

A

Many reject low offers = widely replicated
Resitant to many permutations of game.
‘Irrational’ rejection

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What factors could affect interpersonal decision in economic situations?

A

Dominance, reputation building
Pro-socialising – fariness, altruism, social norms
Motivation to maximise monetary gain

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Who did an expeirment into hertitability of ultimatum game offers?

A

Wallace et al, 2007 – same sex twins in Sweden. Ultimatum game = written down offers
Genes contribute to 42% variance in responder beahviour
No sex differences

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Who did an expeirment into natural testosterone levles and ultimatum game?

A

Burnham, 2007 – high T men reject low ultimatum game offers. Those who reject $5 from $40 = sig higher test levels than those who accept
HIgh T men = more likely to see low offer as challenge - ‘reputation management’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Who did an experiment into ultimatum game whilst manipulatin testosterone levels?

A

Zak et al, 2009 – increasd T levels by spreading Androgel/control gel on shoulders and upper back
T increases minimum acceptance offer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Who did an experiment in to heritability of testosterone levels - what were teh results?

A

Harris et al, 1998 – MZ twins = much more similar than DZ twisn.
Males – 0.66 - 0.34
Females – 0.60 - 0.01
Father son correlation = low - maybe differen genes for differnet age groups?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What is the dictator game?

A

Dictator decides how much to keep and how much to give you

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What did Knafo et al, 2008 do?

A

Looked at region of DNA that regulates experssion of the vasopression 1a receptor. RS3 length = positively associated with higher levels of hippocampal messenger RNA for the vasopressin 1a receptor
i.e. it is v probable that RS3 length determines V1s receptor density.
Longer RS3 promoter region = more vasopressin receptors

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What conclusions did Knafo et al, 2008 draw?

A

LArger the stretch of DNA in someone the more money they deicde to give to other people
Ind diffs in thsi game = at least partially determined by genetic differences relating to vasopressing signalling

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Who did an experiemnt with rs1042778 polymorphism?

A

Israel et al, 2009 – this polymorphism in gene coding for oxytocin receptor = associated with less generous splits to recipient in dictator game

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What is the system that ocntrols motivation for monetary gain?

A

BAS

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Who did an experiment on both games and BIS/BAS scores?

A

Scheres & Sanfey, 2006
HIgher scores on BIS/BAS Qs:
- make higher offer to responders in ultiamatum game (bit weak)
Give less money to recipients in dictator game
Maximise the difference bteween their ultimatum game offer and their dictator game allocation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

How did Scheres & Sanfey, 2006 interpret their results?

A

People with higher BIS/BAS drive seek to maximse likelihood of reward and maximise amount of reward
BAS levels determines strategy (‘UG offer- minus - DG offer reflects ‘strategic thinking’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Who disrupted the PFC and how?

A

Knoch et al, 2006 – TMS.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What were the two main findings of Knoch et al, 2006

A

REjection of low offers because of unfairness = social behaivour limited to human interaction. Sham and L-TMS groups accept many more $4 (from 20 swiss francs) when they know offers are from a computer
Increase in acceptance rate of $4 if PFC = disrupted. Still the same rate of fairness/unfairness

17
Q

How did Knoch et al interpret their results?

A

Low offers = conflict between monetary self-interest and reciprocal fairness
PFC = key role in amending impulses relating to monetary self-interest, enabling subjects to implement faireness goals
Disrupting DLPFC disrupts behavioural responses to unfairness, but does not affect the judgement of unfairness
DLPFC exerts cognitive control. Ind diffs?

18
Q

Two things that may mediate the heritability of ultimatum game responses?

A

DLPFC = strong candidate
Gray & Thompson, 2004 – variations in gray matter volumes = strongly influenced by genetic factors, especaily in frontal regions (E.g. PFC)

19
Q

Three facts about the DLPFC?

A

It matures late
It is the last cortical area to myelinate
Broadmann’s areas 9 and 46