Cited by 158Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesExperimental Behavioral Economics StudiesPsychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment

Dissociable brain networks involved in development of fairness considerations: understanding intentionality behind unfairness

Güroğlu, Berna, van den Bos, Wouter, van Dijk, Eric, Rombouts, Serge A.R.B., Crone, Eveline A.·2011·NeuroImage

Abstract

In this functional magnetic resonance imaging study, we examined developmental changes in the brain regions involved in reactions to unfair allocations. Previous studies on adults suggested that reactions to unfairness are not only affected by the distribution itself but also by the ascribed intentionality of the proposer. In the current study, we employed the mini Ultimatum Game (Falk, Fehr, & Fischbacher, 2003) to examine responder behavior to unfair offers of varying degrees of intentionality. Sixty-eight participants from four age groups (10-, 13-, 15-, and 20-year-olds) carried out the task while fMRI data were acquired. Participants of all ages showed activation in the bilateral insula and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC) during rejection of unintentional but acceptance of intentional unfair offers. Rejection of unintentional unfair offers further involved increasing activation with age in the temporoparietal junction and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. These findings provide evidence for an early developing insula-dACC network involved in detecting personal norm-violations and gradually increasing involvement of temporal and prefrontal brain regions related to intentionality considerations in social reasoning. The results are discussed in light of recent findings on the development of the adolescent social brain network.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.04.032

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Güroğlu, B., van den Bos, W., van Dijk, E., Rombouts, S. A. R. B., & Crone, E. A.
Affiliations
Leiden University (NL)
Corresponding author
Güroğlu, Berna
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-07
Volume
57
Issue
2
Pages
634-641
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1966373398
Cited by
158
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 11
FWCI
6.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
VIDI grant from the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Keywords
fairness, intentionality, ultimatum game, rejection of unfair offers, insula, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, temporoparietal junction, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, brain development, social reasoning
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Brain, Brain Mapping, Child, Female, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Interpersonal Relations, Judgment, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Social Behavior, Comprehension, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review