social cognition Flashcards
social brain hypothesis
the primate brain evolved to be disproportionately large in order to support the social cognition necessary for successful group living
as the group size increases, so does the number of relationships. this increases the cognitive demand
requires expanded social skills, such as cooperation
remembering who did something, did this monkey give me a banana or did they poke me with a stick - determines your actions toward them
what does cooperation require
communication (language and nonverbal communication skills)
memory of past encounters
conflict resolution
social influence
suggests our thoughts, attitudes, beliefs, and actions are influenced by other people
conforming to fit in
can be through social media, auditory and visual stimuli we see around us
our individual judgements are shaped by other’s opinions
we understand and abide by often unwritten rules of etiguette that govern social behaviour
conformity
the tendency for people to shift their own opinions, beliefs, and actions such that they are in agreement with other people
even simple things people conform to
following and going with a group
two reasons people conform: informational conformity and normative conformity
informational conformity
in uncertain situations, we rely on the opinions of others as a source of information
ie/ running from smt because other people are
normative conformity
people may conform to be liked by others
especially when there is no right answer
classic studies of social conformity by solomun asch
people do not want to stand out or be different
everyone says A’s, then the 6th person who the experiment was being done one knows B is the closest, they are still conformed to say A
line matching task after hearing answers from other people
conformity and fMRI results
activity in the rostral cingulate zone (RCz) increased when participants received feedback that their ratings differed from group ratings= similar to a “conflict”
- perceived as an error
activity in the nucleus accumbens (NAc) increased when participants received feedback that their rating agreed with group ratings = similar to a “reward”
- perceived as a positive outcome
social norms
written (laws) and unwritten (what to wear to a funeral) rules that govern social behaviour
- regulate how to function in a group setting
“socially inappropriate” behaviour is associated with:
- traumatic brain injury, especially when frontal lobe damage is implicated
- some kinds of dementia, especially frontatemporal dementia
- people with autism who can have difficulty understanding social norms and expectations
economic games and social norms
neuroimaging studies of social norm compliance have focused on economic games in which social norms of fairness are critical in the game
ie/ ultimatum game
the ultimatum game
take it or leave it game
one player (the giver) decides how to split a reward between themselves and another player (the receiver)
findings from the ultimatum game
offer acceptance decreases as it becomes less fair
unfair offers less accepted when giver is human as opposed to a computer program
increasing unfairness of offer increases activity of insula, ACC and DLPFC
insula: stronger response to unfair offers from humans than a computer
ACC and DLPFC: Potentially due to greater demands on cognitive control for decision making
activity in anterior insula
associated with feeling disgust
this increases with increasing unfairness of an offer
activity in anterior cingulate and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex
important in cognitive control and conflict resolution
higher in receivers when they receive an unfair vs fair offer
damage to orbitofrontal cortex (OFC)
most strongly associated with alterations in social behaviour and judgements
lateral OFC in important in integrating emotional cues with decision making
conclusions about neural basis of social norm hypothesis
the frontal including OFC, DLPFC and ACC are critically involved (needed to comply w/ social norms
these regions are essential for cognitive control and decision making (executive functions) which are necessary for social norm compliance
consistant with the social brain hypothesis: the frontal cortex expanded over evolutionary time to support social cognition
what are the two main theories of understanding other’s thoughts and feeling
simulation theory
theory of mind
two theories are not mutually exclusive, each likely to operate in different circumstances
simulation theory
we understand the mental states of others through simulation, imitation, mimicry, or acting “as if” we are them
ie/ seeing someone cry may make us cry
theory of mind
we have a cognitive representation of other people’s mental states, including their feelings and their knowledge
ie/ professor knowing something, but knows this is the first time student is seeing it
mirror neurons
neural mechanisms of imitation likely depends on this
fire both when taking an action and when observing the same action performed by another
stimulation theory: imitation
can be conscious and unconscious
can contribute to social cohesion, as people tend to mimic friends more than strangers, and likeable strangers more than unlikable stranger
more likely to be when they are primed with pro-social words affiliate, friend, together if we do not mimic - may not like that person as much - or after experiencing social exclusion and have a desire for inclusion
direct eye contact enhances the tendency to mimic another person
neuroimaging demonstrated that superior temporal gyrus (important coding gaze direction) dorsal medial prefrontal cortex , and inferior frontal gyrus showed greater activity when direct gaze was paired with congruent hand
theory of mind
mentalizing
capacity to cognitively represent another person’s mental states and understand that they may be different than one’s own
can be assessed with the false belief task, which activates both the temporoparietal junction and the medial prefrontal cortex
involves thinking about another person’s thoughts
necessary for lying , teachers evaluating a students knowledge
heider-simmel illusion
demonstrated that we attribute mental states to objects when they move in certain ways
mind-in-the-eyes task
participants view pictures of eyes cropped out of a face, and must decide what emotion the person is feeling
regions activated by social animations and mind in the eyes task
inferior frontal cortex
temporoparietal junction
regions activated by false belief task
medial frontal
temporoparietal junctions
empathy
commonly defined as the ability to understand how another feels
components: emotional contagion, cognitive perspective-taking, pro-social action
emotional contagion
causes us to feel as others feel
cognitive perspective-taking
allows us to understand another person’s point of view (mentalizing)
pro-social action
behaviour targeted to help another person in need
empathic accuracy
participant’s ratings of another person’s feelings during a video clip are compared to the person’s own self-report
participants with better matches (higher empathic accuracy) show greater activity in brain areas associated with mirroring and mentalizing
- correlates with original targets
self versus other
can distinguish our feeling from others
we also make mental-state attributions about ourselves
- ie/ reflecting upon our own goals, intentions, feelings, beliefs, etc.
mentalizing about oneself activates similar regionsas when we mentalize about others, suggesting a common basis for mental-state attribution
greater social closeness is associated with greater self-other overlap in neural activity
broken mirror theory
the mirror neuron system may not be operating normally in autism
- mirror neuron deficits seem to be limited to the imitation of facial expression or other emotional gestures, less evidence that nonemotional actions (such as imitative hand movements) are affected
did not activate premotor regions as extremely
effects of autism on social cognition
social deficits may originate from difficulties perceiving and recognizing emotional expressions in others
difficulty in identifying facial expressions, particular when the faces are unfamiliar
- less activation of brain regions involved in processing faces (e.g. fusiform face area)
fixate their gaze less on the eye region of the face
- overlook the social cue of gaze direction which can help us understand what other people are attending to and thinking about
mentalizing (cognitive perspective taking) ability affected
difficulty with mentalizing tasks such as false belief tasks and the mind-in-the-eyes task
less brain activity when attempting to understand the mental states of others, do not tend to activate the brain tegions that neurologically typical people do, such as the mPFC and temporoparietal junction (TPJ)
struggle with cognitive empathy in autism
cognitive interferences required to represent the feeling states of others or to choose appropriate behavioural responses (cognitive perspective-taking)
still experiencing emotional empathy in autism
feeling what others feel (emotional contagion)
when viewing pics of people in pain, brain regions involved in vicarious experience of pain are activated
display affective sharing: when viewing videos of people telling emotional stories, self-reported feelings matched what the believed the storyteller was feeling
perceiving and judging social groups
the brain rapidly distinguishes between in group and out group categories
the ERP methodology is well suited to determine the speed of categorizing stimuli
- studies demonstrated that within a fraction of a seconds, the brain is already responding differently to stimuli based on social category - even if that category is arbitrary
ERP method and judging social groups
ERP response larger in response to faces of ingroup members that out group members
brain imaging shows increased activity in amygdala, orbitofrontal cortex fusiform gyrus in response to in group members than out group members
stereotyping
the tendency to assume that certain characteristics are universally true of group members
brain regions involved in mentalizing (mPFC and temporoparietal juntion) are engaged when people make stereotypical judgements about social groups
prejudice
a negative attitude about a particular social group
discrimination
behaviour that is biased against against a particular social group
racial bias and the brain
unconscious racial bias correlated with amygdala activity
- faster fear conditioning to other-race vs. own race faces
other regions (anterior cingulate and the DLPFC) implicated in cognitive control
- may be activated when participants attempt to control their own racial biases
- better executive function performance associated with less implicit racial bias
stereotype threat
activation of a stereotype can lead to underperformance by a member of a stereotyped group
- when social categories are made salient, people in denigrated social categories may fear confirming the stereotype about their category
- when the stereotype involves cognitive performance and perpetuate the stereotype
- the stress of being reminded of a negative stereotype may activate physiological arousal or increase cognitive load, interfering with cognitive performance
beliefs about a group difference can affect actual cognitive performance
