Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Affective state and decision-making in the Ultimatum Game

  • Research Note
  • Published:
Experimental Brain Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The emerging field of neuroeconomics has provided evidence that emotional as well as cognitive processes may contribute to economic decision-making. Indeed, activation of the anterior insula, a brain area involved in emotional processing, has been shown to predict decision-making in the Ultimatum Game. However, as the insula has also been implicated in other brain functions, converging evidence on the role of emotion in the Ultimatum Game is needed. In the present study, 30 healthy undergraduate students played the Ultimatum Game while their skin conductance responses were measured as an autonomic index of affective state. The results revealed that skin conductance activity was higher for unfair offers and was associated with the rejection of unfair offers in the Ultimatum Game. Interestingly, this pattern was only observed for offers proposed by human conspecifics, but not for offers generated by computers. This provides direct support for economic models that acknowledge the role of emotional brain systems in everyday decision-making.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bechara A, Damasio AR (2005) The somatic marker hypothesis: a neural theory of economic decision. Games Econ Behav 52:336–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechara A, Damasio H, Tranel D, Damasio AR (1997) Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy. Science 275:1293–1295

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bechara A, Damasio H, Damasio AR, Lee GP (1999) Different contributions of the human amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal cortex to decision-making. J Neurosci 19:5473–5481

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bechara A, Damasio H, Tranel D, Damasio AR (2005) The Iowa Gambling Task and the somatic marker hypothesis: some questions and answers. Trends Cogn Sci 9:159–162

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bolton GE, Zwick R (1995) Anonymity versus punishment in Ultimatum Bargaining. Games Econ Behav 10:95–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouscein W (1992) Electrodermal activity. Plenum, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Camerer CF (2003) Strategizing in the brain. Science 300:1673–1675

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Critchley HD, Wiens S, Rotshtein P, Ohman A, Dolan RJ (2004) Neural systems supporting interoceptive awareness. Nat Neurosci 7:189–195

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Damasio AR (1994) Descartes’ error: emotion, reason, and the human brain. Putnam, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Guth W, Schmittberger R, Schwarze B (1982) An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. J Econ Behav Organ 3:367–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guth W, Huck S, Muller W (2001) The relevance of equal splits in ultimatum games. Games Econ Behav 37:161–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maia TV, McClelland JL (2004) A reexamination of the evidence for the somatic marker hypothesis: what participants really know in the Iowa gambling task. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 101:16075–16080

  • Nowak MA, Page KM, Sigmund K (2000) Fairness versus reason in the Ultimatum Game. Science 289:1773–1775

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips ML, Young AW, Senior C, Brammer M, Andrew C, Calder AJ, Bullmore ET, Perrett DI, Rowland D, Williams SCR, Gray JA, David AS (1997) A specific neural substrate for perceiving facial expressions of disgust. Nature 389:495–498

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pillutla MM, Murnighan JK (1996) Unfairness, anger, and spite: emotional rejections of Ultimatum Offers. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 68:208–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth AE (1995) Bargaining experiments. In: Kagal J, Roth A (eds) Handbook of experimental economics. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 253–342

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanfey AG, Rilling JK, Aronson JA, Nystrom LE, Cohen JD (2003) The neural basis of economic decision-making in the ultimatum game. Science 300:1755–1758

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank T. Rietkerk for help with data collection. M. van ’t Wout and A. Aleman were supported by a VernieuwingsImpuls grant (no 016.026.027) from the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychonomics, Helmholtz Institute, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 2, 3584 CS, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Mascha van ’t Wout

  2. Department of Psychiatry, Rudolf Magnus Institute of Neuroscience, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Mascha van ’t Wout & René S. Kahn

  3. Department of Psychology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA

    Alan G. Sanfey

  4. BCN NeuroImaging Center, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    André Aleman

Authors
  1. Mascha van ’t Wout
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. René S. Kahn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alan G. Sanfey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. André Aleman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mascha van ’t Wout.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

van ’t Wout, M., Kahn, R.S., Sanfey, A.G. et al. Affective state and decision-making in the Ultimatum Game. Exp Brain Res 169, 564–568 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-006-0346-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-006-0346-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation