MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2748756587 · doi:10.1093/scan/nsx097

Human substantia nigra and ventral tegmental area involvement in computing social error signals during the ultimatum game

2017· article· en· W2748756587 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sébastien Hétu, Yi Luo, Kimberlee D’Ardenne, Terry Lohrenz, P. Read Montague

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institute on Drug AbuseWellcome TrustArizona State University
KeywordsVentral tegmental areaSubstantia nigraPsychologyUltimatum gameNeuroscienceSocial psychologyCognitive psychologyDopamineDopaminergic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As models of shared expectations, social norms play an essential role in our societies. Since our social environment is changing constantly, our internal models of it also need to change. In humans, there is mounting evidence that neural structures such as the insula and the ventral striatum are involved in detecting norm violation and updating internal models. However, because of methodological challenges, little is known about the possible involvement of midbrain structures in detecting norm violation and updating internal models of our norms. Here, we used high-resolution cardiac-gated functional magnetic resonance imaging and a norm adaptation paradigm in healthy adults to investigate the role of the substantia nigra/ventral tegmental area (SN/VTA) complex in tracking signals related to norm violation that can be used to update internal norms. We show that the SN/VTA codes for the norm's variance prediction error (PE) and norm PE with spatially distinct regions coding for negative and positive norm PE. These results point to a common role played by the SN/VTA complex in supporting both simple reward-based and social decision making.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.170
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Cognitive and Affective NeuroscienceSame topicNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFrench-language works237,207