It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Neocortical structures of the left frontal lobe, middle frontal gyrus (MFG) in particular, have been suggested to be linked to the processing of punishing and unpleasant outcomes in decision tasks. To assess the role of left MFG (lMFG) in communicative decisions, we used repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) to inhibit its function during communicational exchanges under two types of social contexts: formal and informal. Three groups of participants received an offline 1-Hz inhibitory rTMS of lMFG, right MFG as an active control site, or lMFG sham/placebo TMS as a passive control condition. Participants’ task included answering difficult general-knowledge questions, rating their confidence in their answers’ correctness, and, finally, deciding if they would report or withhold these answers in formal and informal social contexts. There were significantly more reported than withheld answers in the informal context in all groups. The formal context showed no differences between reported and withheld answers in both control conditions, while, crucially, real rTMS of lMFG produced a different pattern, with more withheld than reported answers. Thus, lMFG inhibition seems to result in more rational decisions made only in formal communication contexts, where there is a perception of a certain pressure or possible negative outcomes. In informal social contexts and in the absence of negative consequences the pattern of answers did not change, regardless of the reporting strategy or the TMS protocol used. These results suggest selective context-dependent involvement of the lMFG in decision-making processes during communicational exchanges taking place under social pressure.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 HSE University, Centre for Cognition and Decision Making, Institute for Cognitive Neuroscience, Moscow, Russia (GRID:grid.410682.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 0578 2005)
2 HSE University, Centre for Cognition and Decision Making, Institute for Cognitive Neuroscience, Moscow, Russia (GRID:grid.410682.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 0578 2005); Northumbria University, Department of Psychology, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK (GRID:grid.42629.3b) (ISNI:0000000121965555)
3 Aarhus University, Department of Clinical Medicine, Center of Functionally Integrative Neuroscience (CFIN), Aarhus, Denmark (GRID:grid.7048.b) (ISNI:0000 0001 1956 2722)