Cited by 175Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorNeuroendocrine regulation and behavior

Social Network Modulation of Reward-Related Signals

Open access
Fareri, D. S., Niznikiewicz, M. A., Lee, V. K., Delgado, M. R.·2012·Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Everyday goals and experiences are often shared with others who may hold different places within our social networks. We investigated whether the experience of sharing a reward differs with respect to social network. Twenty human participants played a card guessing game for shared monetary outcomes with three partners: a computer, a confederate (out of network), and a friend (in network). Participants subjectively rated the experience of sharing a reward more positively with their friends than the other partners. Neuroimaging results support participants' subjective reports, as ventral striatal BOLD responses were more robust when sharing monetary gains with a friend as compared to the confederate or computer, suggesting a higher value for sharing with an in-network partner. Interestingly, ratings of social closeness covaried with this activity, resulting in a significant partner × closeness interaction; exploratory analysis showed that only participants reporting higher levels of closeness demonstrated partner-related differences in striatal BOLD response. These results suggest that reward valuation in social contexts is sensitive to distinctions of social network, such that sharing positive experiences with in-network others may carry higher value.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1523/jneurosci.0610-12.2012

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The experience and evaluation of an objectively quantifiable reward such as a $2 gain on a gamble is modified by the presence of another person.

    “For example, the experience and evaluation of an objectively quantifiable reward such as a $2 gain on a gamble is modified by the presence of another person 54.”
  • When a monetary gain is shared with a friend (compared to a stranger or a computer), people rate the experience as more exciting, and striatum activity is increased.

    “Specifically, when a monetary gain is shared with a friend (compared to a stranger or a computer) people rate the experience as more exciting, and striatum activity is increased (see Figure 2).”
  • Humans may value the experience of cooperation over and above the objective value of rewards yielded by cooperation.

    “Along with other research on shared rewards 54 (see Figure 2), this research suggests that humans may value the experience of cooperation over and above the objective value of rewards yielded by cooperation 73, 74.”
  • Neural circuits that regulate responses to reward-relevant stimuli are also involved in processing social rewards and may operate to reinforce connections with others.

    “neural circuits that regulate responses to reward-relevant stimuli (e.g., striatum, orbitofrontal cortex) are also involved in processing social rewards (e.g., receiving positive social feedback; Izuma, Saito, & Sadato, 2008), and thus may operate to reinforce our connections with others”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Talairach J Tournoux P 1988 Co-planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain: An Approach to Medical Cerebral Imaging New York Thieme Medical Publisher

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fareri, D. S., Niznikiewicz, M. A., Lee, V. K., & Delgado, M. R.
Affiliations
  • Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
  • University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
  • Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
Delgado, M. R.
Venue
Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2012-06-27
Volume
32
Issue
26
Pages
9045-9052
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2042637398
Cited by
175
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 3
FWCI
8.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH084081)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
Keywords
social networks, reward sharing, monetary rewards, ventral striatum, social proximity, social partners, BOLD signal
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Analysis of Variance, Brain, Brain Mapping, Female, Galvanic Skin Response, Games, Experimental, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Oxygen, Reward, Social Support, Case-Control Studies, Friends, 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