Decision-making in amnesia: do advantageous decisions require conscious knowledge of previous behavioural choices?

Previous work has reported that in the Iowa gambling task (IGT) advantageous decisions may be taken before the advantageous strategy is known [Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D., ; Damasio, A. R. (1997). Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy. Science, 275, 1293-1295]. In order to test whether explicit memory is essential for the acquisition of a behavioural preference for advantageous choices, we measured behavioural performance and skin conductance responses (SCRs) in five patients with dense amnesia following damage to the basal forebrain and orbitofrontal cortex, six amnesic patients with damage to the medial temporal lobe or the diencephalon, and eight control subjects performing the IGT. Across 100 trials healthy participants acquired a preference for advantageous choices and generated large SCRs to high levels of punishment. In addition, their anticipatory SCRs to disadvantageous choices were larger than to advantageous choices. However, this dissociation occurred much later than the behavioural preference for advantageous alternatives. In contrast, though exhibiting discriminatory autonomic SCRs to different levels of punishment, 9 of 11 amnesic patients performed at chance and did not show differential anticipatory SCRs to advantageous and disadvantageous choices. Further, the magnitude of anticipatory SCRs did not correlate with behavioural performance. These results suggest that the acquisition of a behavioural preference--be it for advantageous or disadvantageous choices--depends on the memory of previous reinforcements encountered in the task, a capacity requiring intact explicit memory.

A Normative Theory of Forgetting: Lessons from the Fruit Fly

Recent experiments revealed that the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster has a dedicated mechanism for forgetting: blocking the G-protein Rac leads to slower and activating Rac to faster forgetting. This active form of forgetting lacks a satisfactory functional explanation. We investigated optimal decision making for an agent adapting to a stochastic environment where a stimulus may switch between being indicative of reward or punishment. Like Drosophila, an optimal agent shows forgetting with a rate that is linked to the time scale of changes in the environment. Moreover, to reduce the odds of missing future reward, an optimal agent may trade the risk of immediate pain for information gain and thus forget faster after aversive conditioning. A simple neuronal network reproduces these features. Our theory shows that forgetting in Drosophila appears as an optimal adaptive behavior in a changing environment. This is in line with the view that forgetting is adaptive rather than a consequence of limitations of the memory system.

Diminishing parochialism in intergroup conflict by disrupting the right temporo-parietal junction.

Individuals react to violation of social norms by outgroup members differently than to transgressions of those same norms by ingroup members: namely outgroup perpetrators are punished much more harshly than ingroup perpetrators. This parochial punishment pattern has been observed and extensively studied in social psychology and behavioral economics. Despite progress in recent years, however, little is known about the neural underpinnings of this intergroup bias. Here, we demonstrate by means of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) that the transient disruption of the right, but not the left temporo-parietal junction (TPJ), reduces parochial punishment in a third-party punishment paradigm with real social groups. Moreover, we show that this observed TMS effect on parochial punishment is mediated by a classical punishment motive, i.e. retaliation. Finally, our data suggests that a change in perspective-taking might be the underlying mechanism that explains the impact of right TPJ disruption on retaliation motivation and parochial punishment. These findings provide the first causal evidence that the right TPJ plays a pivotal role in the implementation of parochial behaviors.

The mentalizing network orchestrates the impact of parochial altruism on social norm enforcement.

Parochial altruism - a preference for altruistic behavior towards ingroup members and mistrust or hostility towards outgroup members--is a pervasive feature in human society and strongly shapes the enforcement of social norms. Since the uniqueness of human society critically depends on the enforcement of norms, the understanding of the neural circuitry of the impact of parochial altruism on social norm enforcement is key, but unexplored. To fill this gap, we measured brain activity with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) while subjects had the opportunity to punish ingroup members and outgroup members for violating social norms. Findings revealed that subjects' strong punishment of defecting outgroup members is associated with increased activity in a functionally connected network involved in sanction-related decisions (right orbitofrontal gyrus, right lateral prefrontal cortex, right dorsal caudatus). Moreover, the stronger the connectivity in this network, the more outgroup members are punished. In contrast, the much weaker punishment of ingroup members who committed the very same norm violation is associated with increased activity and connectivity in the mentalizing-network (dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, bilateral temporo-parietal junction), as if subjects tried to understand or justify ingroup members' behavior. Finally, connectivity analyses between the two networks suggest that the mentalizing-network modulates punishment by affecting the activity in the right orbitofrontal gyrus and right lateral prefrontal cortex, notably in the same areas showing enhanced activity and connectivity whenever third-parties strongly punished defecting outgroup members.

Diminishing reciprocal fairness by disrupting the right prefrontal cortex.

Humans restrain self-interest with moral and social values. They are the only species known to exhibit reciprocal fairness, which implies the punishment of other individuals' unfair behaviors, even if it hurts the punisher's economic self-interest. Reciprocal fairness has been demonstrated in the Ultimatum Game, where players often reject their bargaining partner's unfair offers. Despite progress in recent years, however, little is known about how the human brain limits the impact of selfish motives and implements fair behavior. Here we show that disruption of the right, but not the left, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) by low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation substantially reduces subjects' willingness to reject their partners' intentionally unfair offers, which suggests that subjects are less able to resist the economic temptation to accept these offers. Importantly, however, subjects still judge such offers as very unfair, which indicates that the right DLPFC plays a key role in the implementation of fairness-related behaviors.

Trust, Competition and Cooperation in Autism Spectrum Disorder

Objective: Impaired social interactions and repetitive behavior are key features of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). In the present study we compared social decision-making in subjects with and without ASD. Subjects performed five social decision-making games in order to assess trust, fairness, cooperation & competition behavior and social value orientation. Methods: 19 adults with autism spectrum disorder and 17 controls, matched for age and education, participated in the study. Each subject performed five social decision-making tasks. In the trust game, subjects could maximize their gain by sharing some of their money with another person. In the punishment game, subjects played two versions of the Dictator’s Dilemma. In the dictator condition they could share an amount of 0-100 points with another person. In the punishment condition, the opponent was able to punish the subject if he/she was not satisfied with the amount of points received. In the cooperation game, subjects played with a small group of 3 people. Each of them could (anonymously) select an amount of 5, 7.5 or 10 Swiss francs. The goal of the game was to achieve a high group minimum. In the competition game, subjects performed a dexterity task. Before performing the task, they were asked whether they wanted to compete (winner takes it all) or cooperation (sharing the joint achieved amount of points) with a randomly selected person. Lastly, subjects performed a social value orientation task where they were playing for themselves and for another person. Results: There was no overall difference between healthy controls an ASD subjects in investment in the trust game. However, healthy controls increased their investment over number of trials whereas ASD subjects did not. A similar pattern was found for the punishment game. Furthermore, ASD subjects revealed a decreased investment in the dictator condition of the punishment game. There were no mean differences in competition behavior and social value orientation. Conclusions: The results provide evidence for differences between ASD subjects and healthy controls in social decision-making. Subjects with ASD showed a more consistent behavior than healthy controls in the trust game and the dictator dilemma. The present findings provide evidence for impaired social learning in ASD.

Kriegsverbrechen – Verbrechen gegen die Menschlichkeit – Völkermord? Zeitgenössische Völkerrechtler und die Deportation der christlichen Minderheiten in Anatolien während des Ersten Weltkrieges

This presentation concentrates on the role that the deportation of Christian minorities in Anatolia during the First World War played in the context of the history of law. Terminologies and the use of legal notions by contemporaries will be a special focus, because this is still helpful in the context of present-day discussions. Therefore a contextualisation as precise as possible is important, when the topic of deportation and genocide is addressed. At the same time it is important not to confuse historical and legal appraisals. In this presentation the general discussion as to the prospects and potential of a judicial punishment of violations of international legal norms before as well as during the First World War will therefore be included as much as the attitude of jurists in regard to the position of the Ottoman Empire within the international community of law abiding states. Finally this presentation will also focus on discussions at the end of the war around the trials in Istanbul and the purpose of the Paris Peace Conference. In this context and following ideas of Mahmood Mamdani the discourse on law can be shown to have served not only as a way of giving victims a voice, but also as a language of power already at the beginning of the 20th century.

The effects of legal involvement on crime victims' psychological adjustment

The purpose of this chapter is to examine the effects of legal involvement of crime victims on their psychological adjustment. First, causes of possible effects are described, which may be located within the procedure or the outcome of the legal process. Then, the available evidence is reviewed, most of it suggesting that legal involvement does not strongly affect the victims' psychological adjustment, neither negatively nor positively. The chapter continues with a discussion of whether victims should be advised to report the assault to the police or not, and it describes relevant decision criteria, such as victim adjustment retributive justice, victim compensation, victim security and societal security. Finally, suggestions for future research are outlined, pointing to necessary methodological improvements in the design of future studies on legal involvement.

Neuroanatomy of intergroup bias: A white matter microstructure study of individual differences

Intergroup bias - the tendency to behave more positively towards an ingroup member than an outgroup member - is a powerful social force, for good and ill. And though it is widely demonstrated, intergroup bias is not universal, as it is characterized by significant individual differences. Recently, attention has begun to turn to whether neuroanatomy might explain these individual differences in intergroup bias. However, no research to date has examined whether white matter microstructure could help determine differences in behavior towards ingroup and outgroup members. In the current research, we examine intergroup bias with the third-party punishment paradigm and white matter integrity and connectivity strength as determined by diffusion tensor imaging (DTI). We found that both increased white matter integrity at the right temporal-parietal junction (TPJ) and connectivity strength between the right TPJ and the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (DMPFC) were associated with increased impartiality in the third-party punishment paradigm, i.e., reduced intergroup bias. Further, consistent with the role that these brain regions play in the mentalizing network, we found that these effects were mediated by mentalizing processes. Participants with greater white matter integrity at the right TPJ and connectivity strength between the right TPJ and the DMPFC employed mentalizing processes more equally for ingroup and outgroup members, and this non-biased use of mentalizing was associated with increased impartiality. The current results help shed light on the mechanisms of bias and, potentially, on interventions that promote impartiality over intergroup bias.