ArticlePsychophysiology2025
Electrophysiological correlates of why humans deviate from rational decision-making: A registered replication study.
Article in Psychophysiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In contrast to rational choice theory predicting humans to optimize expected utilities of choices, humans deviate from rational behavior in decision-making paradigms. Hewig et al. (2011) explored affective correlates of decision-making in the ultimatum game (UG) and the dictator game (DG). They found that feedback-related negativity (FRN), subjective valence ratings, and autonomic nervous system activity predicted rejection of monetary offers. This registered replication aimed to validate and extend these findings. Although behavioral patterns and results of subjective ratings closely matched the original study, not all psychophysiological effects were successfully replicated. Firstly, we could not replicate the reported effects of autonomic nervous system activity. Secondly, a quadratic instead of the originally proposed linear relation between the offer and the FRN emerged, possibly driven by the offer evaluation in economic games and the rewarding anticipation of successful punishment for low offers. Thirdly, P3 amplitudes mirrored the quadratic offer response pattern, generally peaking for the lowest offer. In contrast to the original study, P3 responses were larger in the UG compared with the DG. Finally, our findings indicate that participant-related higher midfrontal theta activation predicted lower acceptance behavior in the UG, with a systematic dampening effect for fairer offers. This highlights cognitive control as a crucial mechanism in economic decision-making to overcome behavioral defaults. Overall, our results conceptually support the original conclusion that decision-making in economic games is non-rational and dependent on the objective situation as well as emotional and neural markers, though not precisely as suggested by Hewig et al. (2011).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.