Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38621996›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2024

Neural Reward Representations Enable Utilitarian Welfare Maximization.

Alexander Soutschek, Christopher J Burke, Pyungwon Kang, Nuri Wieland, Nick Netzer, Philippe N Tobler

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. How the Ventromedial Prefrontal Cortex (VMPFC) Facilitates Welfare Maximization in Social Contexts.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  3. Tipping the balance between fairness and efficiency through temporoparietal stimulation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Alexander SoutschekDepartment of Psychology, Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Munich 80802, Germany alexander.soutschek@psy.lmu.de.ORCID 0000-0001-8438-7721
Christopher J BurkeDepartment of Economics, University of Zurich, Zurich 8006, Switzerland.
Pyungwon KangDepartment of Economics, University of Zurich, Zurich 8006, Switzerland.
Nuri WielandCatholic University of Applied Sciences North Rhine-Westphalia, Cologne 50668, Germany.
Nick NetzerDepartment of Economics, University of Zurich, Zurich 8006, Switzerland.
Philippe N ToblerDepartment of Economics, University of Zurich, Zurich 8006, Switzerland.
University of Zurich · CHCatholic University of Applied Sciences of North Rhine – Westphalia · DELudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

From deciding which meal to prepare for our guests to trading off the proenvironmental effects of climate protection measures against their economic costs, we often must consider the consequences of our actions for the well-being of others (welfare). Vexingly, the tastes and views of others can vary widely. To maximize welfare according to the utilitarian philosophical tradition, decision-makers facing conflicting preferences of others should choose the option that maximizes the sum of the subjective value (utility) of the entire group. This notion requires comparing the intensities of preferences across individuals. However, it remains unclear whether such comparisons are possible at all and (if they are possible) how they might be implemented in the brain. Here, we show that female and male participants can both learn the preferences of others by observing their choices and represent these preferences on a common scale to make utilitarian welfare decisions. On the neural level, multivariate support vector regressions revealed that a distributed activity pattern in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (VMPFC), a brain region previously associated with reward processing, represented the preference strength of others. Strikingly, also the utilitarian welfare of others was represented in the VMPFC and relied on the same neural code as the estimated preferences of others. Together, our findings reveal that humans can behave as if they maximized utilitarian welfare using a specific utility representation and that the brain enables such choices by repurposing neural machinery processing the reward others receive.

Indexed as

RewardAdultBrain MappingChoice BehaviorDecision MakingFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMalePrefrontal CortexYoung Adultmultivariate analysesneural reward systemsocial decision neuroscienceutilitarianismVMPFC

Identifiers

PMID38621996
PMCPMC11112638
OpenAlexW4394805721

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.