Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41014463›Full record

ArticleBrain imaging and behavior2025

Exploring individual differences in the impact of cognitive constraints on prosocial decision-making via intrinsic brain connectivity.

Zhengjie Liu, Jie Liu, Fang Cui

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Brain imaging and behavior, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Zhengjie LiuSchool of Psychology, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, 518060, China.
Jie LiuSchool of Psychology, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, 518060, China. ljier06@gmail.com.
Fang CuiSchool of Psychology, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, 518060, China.

Funding

the National Natural Science Foundation of China 32171013
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prosocial decisions in daily life are often influenced by cognitive constraints, such as time pressure and cognitive load, which can impact how we process information and make decisions that benefit others. Understanding how these constraints interact with our brain's intrinsic connectivity patterns and contribute to individual differences is crucial. This study investigates the neural mechanisms underlying the effects of cognitive constraints on prosocial decision-making. We developed a resting-state functional connectivity (rsFC) network model using machine learning regression to predict how cognitive constraints influence prosocial choices, while accounting for individual variability through intersubject representational similarity analysis (IS-RSA). Our findings reveal that the rsFC network-including regions involved in affective processing (insula, INS; amygdala, AMYG), empathy (temporo-parietal junction, TPJ; medial cingulate gyrus, MCG), and valuation (ventral striatum, VS; ventral prefrontal cortex, vmPFC)-predicts the impact of cognitive constraints on decision-making. Notably, rsFC between MCG and TPJ and bilateral TPJ connectivity showed intersubject variability that aligned with behavioral responses. These findings elucidate how cognitive constraints shape prosocial decision-making at the neural level, uncovering individual variability that advances theoretical understanding and offers practical implications for fostering prosociality in cognitively demanding contexts.

Indexed as

BrainCognitionDecision MakingIndividualitySocial BehaviorAdultBrain MappingEmpathyFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleNeural PathwaysYoung AdultCognitive constraintsIntersubject representational similarity analysisMachine learning regressionProsocial decision-makingResting-state fMRI

Identifiers

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.