Cited by 1,024Experimental Behavioral Economics StudiesNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesPsychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment

Diminishing reciprocal fairness by disrupting the right prefrontal cortex

Open access
Knoch, Daria, Pascual-Leone, Alvaro, Meyer, Kaspar, Treyer, Valerie, Fehr, Ernst·2006·Science

Abstract

Humans restrain self-interest with moral and social values. They are the only species known to exhibit reciprocal fairness, which implies the punishment of other individuals' unfair behaviors, even if it hurts the punisher's economic self-interest. Reciprocal fairness has been demonstrated in the Ultimatum Game, where players often reject their bargaining partner's unfair offers. Despite progress in recent years, however, little is known about how the human brain limits the impact of selfish motives and implements fair behavior. Here we show that disruption of the right, but not the left, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) by low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation substantially reduces subjects' willingness to reject their partners' intentionally unfair offers, which suggests that subjects are less able to resist the economic temptation to accept these offers. Importantly, however, subjects still judge such offers as very unfair, which indicates that the right DLPFC plays a key role in the implementation of fairness-related behaviors.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1126/science.1129156

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Knoch, D., Pascual-Leone, A., Meyer, K., Treyer, V., & Fehr, E.
Affiliations
  • Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
  • Institute for Empirical Research in Economics, University of Zurich, Blümlisalpstrasse 10, 8006 Zurich, Switzerland.
Corresponding author
  • Knoch, Daria
  • Fehr, Ernst
Venue
Science
Published
2006-11-03
Volume
314
Issue
5800
Pages
829-832
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W2105563024
Cited by
1,024
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 77 · 2017: 53 · 2016: 57 · 2015: 59 · 2014: 62 · 2013: 62 · 2012: 81
FWCI
163.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • BORIS (University Library Bern) (submittedVersion)
  • Archive ouverte UNIGE (University of Geneva) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
National Center for Research Resources (K24RR018875)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Keywords
right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, ultimatum game, rejection of unfair offers, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, self-interest, fairness judgments, moral behavior
MeSH terms
Adult, Decision Making, Games, Experimental, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Judgment, Functional Laterality, Male, Social Behavior, Prefrontal Cortex, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

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