Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25327760›Full record

SynthesisHuman brain mapping2015

Neural signatures of fairness-related normative decision making in the ultimatum game: a coordinate-based meta-analysis.

Chunliang Feng, Yue-Jia Luo, Frank Krueger

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Human brain mapping, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 101 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
101citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

101 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Task-guided accelerated cTBS simultaneously treats depression and social dysfunction in patients with major depressive disorder: a randomized clinical trial.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Neurobiological Mechanisms of Responding to Injustice.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2018
    Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

41 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Chunliang FengState Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
Yue-Jia Luo
Frank Krueger

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The willingness to incur personal costs to enforce prosocial norms represents a hallmark of human civilization. Although recent neuroscience studies have used the ultimatum game to understand the neuropsychological mechanisms that underlie the enforcement of fairness norms; however, a precise characterization of the neural systems underlying fairness-related norm enforcement remains elusive. In this study, we used a coordinate-based meta-analysis on functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies using the ultimatum game with the goal to provide an additional level of evidence for the refinement of the underlying neural architecture of this human puzzling behavior. Our results demonstrated a convergence of reported activation foci in brain networks associated with psychological components of fairness-related normative decision making, presumably reflecting a reflexive and intuitive system (System 1) and a reflective and deliberate system (System 2). System 1 (anterior insula, ventromedial prefrontal cortex [PFC]) may be associated with the reflexive and intuitive responses to norm violations, representing a motivation to punish norm violators. Those intuitive responses conflict with economic self-interest, encoded in the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), which may engage cognitive control from a reflective and deliberate System 2 to resolve the conflict by either suppressing (ventrolateral PFC, dorsomedial PFC, left dorsolateral PFC, and rostral ACC) the intuitive responses or over-riding self-interest (right dorsolateral PFC). Taken together, we suggest that fairness-related norm enforcement recruits an intuitive system for rapid evaluation of norm violations and a deliberate system for integrating both social norms and self-interest to regulate the intuitive system in favor of more flexible decision making.

Indexed as

Social BehaviorBrainDecision MakingGames, ExperimentalHumansMagnetic Resonance Imagingactivation likelihood estimationfairnessfMRImultiple-system modelsnorm enforcementultimatum game

Identifiers

PMID25327760
PMCPMC6869807

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.