Psychophysiological correlates of interpersonal cooperation and aggression

Abstract

Mimicking real world situations, the Chicken Game allows scientists to examine human decision-making when the outcome is not entirely within one person's control. In this social dilemma task, two players independently choose either to safely cooperate with, or riskily aggress against, the other player, and the unique combination of their choices specifies the outcome for each. Coupling the Chicken Game with psychophysiological measures, we confirmed our two hypotheses: that an individual perceives an outcome as most negative when she chooses to cooperate and the other player violates that trust and aggresses, and that motivational salience of an outcome is greater when an individual chooses to aggress and when she gains money. Collectively, the data demonstrate the utility of pairing true social dilemma tasks like the Chicken Game with psychophysiological measures to better understand decision-making.