An fMRI study on how decisions are influenced by affective evaluations from different social hierarchical positions

Abstract

Expectation States Theory suggests that social status carries emotions, with higher statuses producing positive emotions and lower statuses leading to negative emotions. However, the theory is broad and lacks empirical evidence. This study investigated whether positive and negative evaluations from positions of higher and lower social hierarchies affect decisions. We examined whether decision making is influenced when evaluations were given in a first (L1) versus second language (L2). Bilinguals read scenarios in which they imagined themselves in the middle of the hierarchy. They then made a series of decisions, each of which was preceded with an evaluative word from other individuals whose hierarchical positions were higher or lower. The behavioral results showed that negative evaluations from higher positions exerted greater impact on decisions than when negative evaluations came from a lower position. At the neural level, after receiving negative evaluations, a higher hierarchy elicited greater activation in the right inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), left supplementary motor area (SMA), right precentral gyrus, left fusiform gyrus, bilateral inferior occipital gyrus (IOG), and right AI compared to a lower hierarchy, which may be caused by the view that a negative evaluation from a higher hierarchy is criticism. Conversely, after receiving positive evaluations, the lower hierarchy elicited greater activation in the right IFG, left SMA, right precentral gyrus, bilateral IOG, right AI and right IPS compared to the higher hierarchy, which may be due to the fact that positive evaluations from positions of lower hierarchies are perceived as encouraging. Together, these findings support Expectation States Theory in that regardless of whether evaluative advice is given in an L1 or L2, there is an internal association between social status and social-emotional neural responses that are localized in the frontal–parietal and visual cortices.

Appendices

Appendix A

See Table 

Table 5 Means and ± SDs of participants’ language characteristics

5,

Table 6 Stimuli used in the experiment

6,

Table 7 Results of paired samples T-tests of familiarity and emotional valence for L1 and L2

7,

Table 8 Results of paired samples T-tests of familiarity and emotional valence for positive and negative words

8, and

Table 9 Correlated analysis between OPT scores and behavior/neural data in each condition

9

Appendix B

See Fig. 

Fig. 5

The implementation rate in L1 (a) and L2 (b), and the reaction time in L1 (c) and L2 (d)

5

Appendix C

Story scenario used in the experiment

Story scenario 1 in L1: 你是一名投资顾问, 你在汇报你推荐给客户的股票, 以及股票涨价的可能性。团队里的其他人会对你的推荐计划做出评价, 但最终将由你自己决定执行与否, 成功或失败都由你自己承担。

Story scenario 1 in L2: You are an investment adviser, and making a report about the stock recommendation to your team. You will tell them the rising possibility of stock. The others will make comments on your recommendation, but they will not make the final decision about conducting the recommendation or not. You have to decide it and undertake the success or failure by yourself.

Story scenario 2 in L1: 你是一名销售员, 你正在汇报你的交易方案, 以及交易获益的可能性。其他人会对你的方案做出评价, 但最终将由你自己决定执行与否, 成功或失败都由你自己承担。

Story scenario 2 in L2: You are a salesperson, and you are making a report about your transaction scheme and the possibility of obtaining benefits. The others will make comments on your plan, but they will not make the final decision about conducting the plan or not. You have to decide it and undertake the success or failure by yourself.