Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42897303›Full record

ArticleNature neuroscience2026

An amygdala-mediated simulation-to-decision cascade aligns interbrain dynamics to solve social dilemmas.

Jun Ni, Fangang Meng, Chao Zhang, Huixin Tan, Xiaoyu Zeng, Jiaxin Yang, HuanJia Li, Yuan Qi, Yuchi Yan, Yanyang Zhang and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature neuroscience, 2026. 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

12 authors.

Jun Ni *State Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning, Faculty of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1065-3377
Fangang Meng *Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Chao Zhang *Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Huixin TanState Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning, Faculty of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
Xiaoyu ZengState Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning, Faculty of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7983-6155
Jiaxin YangState Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning, Faculty of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
HuanJia LiState Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning, Faculty of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
Yuan QiState Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning, Faculty of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
Yuchi YanState Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning, Faculty of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
Yanyang ZhangDepartment of Neurosurgery, The First Medical Centre of Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Kai ZhangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Yina MaState Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning, Faculty of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China. yma@bnu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5457-0354

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China (National Science Foundation of China) 32125019National Natural Science Foundation of China (National Science Foundation of China) 32430041
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mutual cooperation (MC) requires independent decision-makers to coordinate under uncertainty about each other's intentions. Using simultaneous intracranial electroencephalography from epilepsy-patient dyads playing a real-time iterated prisoner's dilemma, we identified neurocognitive mechanisms that enable interacting brains to align during mutual cooperation. Amygdala interbrain representational alignment (IBRA), similarity in fine-grained neural spectral patterns across partners, emerged selectively during MC and predicted trial-by-trial outcomes. Early θ-suppression-characterized IBRA reflected rapid, history-sensitive alignment, whereas later IBRA, characterized by low-frequency suppression and γ increases, supported coordinated commitment and action. Furthermore, mutual cooperation relied on an amygdala-mediated, simulation-to-decision cascade, operationalized here as a model-based prospective estimate of partner cooperation that guided self-choice. Amygdala low-frequency suppression tracked this prospective estimate of partner cooperation and θ-γ coupling linked this partner estimate to self-decision processes. Conditional cooperators strategically relied on partner tracking, whereas unconditional cooperators leveraged dispositional tolerance of uncertainty to transition into anticipatory neural alignment. These findings reveal the neural interdependency underpinning MC, redefining cooperation not as isolated decision-making but as a dynamic, interbrain, cognitive alignment.

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.