scholarly journals Learning biases underlying individual differences in sensitivity to social rejection.

Emotion ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 616-621 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Olsson ◽  
Susanna Carmona ◽  
Geraldine Downey ◽  
Niall Bolger ◽  
Kevin N. Ochsner
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Social Rejection ◽  
Learning Biases

scholarly journals Striatal structure and function predict individual biases in learning to avoid pain

2016 ◽  
Vol 113 (17) ◽  
pp. 4812-4817 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eran Eldar ◽  
Tobias U. Hauser ◽  
Peter Dayan ◽  
Raymond J. Dolan
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Prediction Error ◽  
Outcome Prediction ◽  
Structure And Function ◽  
Pain Modulation ◽  
Prediction Errors ◽  
Learning Biases ◽  
Individual Traits ◽  
And Function ◽  
Pain Prediction

Pain is an elemental inducer of avoidance. Here, we demonstrate that people differ in how they learn to avoid pain, with some individuals refraining from actions that resulted in painful outcomes, whereas others favor actions that helped prevent pain. These individual biases were best explained by differences in learning from outcome prediction errors and were associated with distinct forms of striatal responses to painful outcomes. Specifically, striatal responses to pain were modulated in a manner consistent with an aversive prediction error in individuals who learned predominantly from pain, whereas in individuals who learned predominantly from success in preventing pain, modulation was consistent with an appetitive prediction error. In contrast, striatal responses to success in preventing pain were consistent with an appetitive prediction error in both groups. Furthermore, variation in striatal structure, encompassing the region where pain prediction errors were expressed, predicted participants’ predominant mode of learning, suggesting the observed learning biases may reflect stable individual traits. These results reveal functional and structural neural components underlying individual differences in avoidance learning, which may be important contributors to psychiatric disorders involving pathological harm avoidance behavior.

scholarly journals Individual differences in neural responses to social rejection: the joint effect of self-esteem and attentional control

2011 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 322-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anett Gyurak ◽  
Christine I. Hooker ◽  
Asako Miyakawa ◽  
Sara Verosky ◽  
Anna Luerssen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Attentional Control ◽  
Self Esteem ◽  
Joint Effect ◽  
Social Rejection ◽  
Neural Responses

scholarly journals Follow your heart? Examining heart rate variability as a predictor of neural reactivity to social rejection - A network approach to individual differences in social threat sensitivity

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elise Kortink ◽  
Wouter Weeda ◽  
Bart Verkuil ◽  
Selin Topel ◽  
Melle J. W. van der Molen
Keyword(s):  
Heart Rate ◽  
Heart Rate Variability ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Social Rejection ◽  
Integration Theory ◽  
Social Threat ◽  
Theta Power ◽  
Threat Sensitivity ◽  
Power Increase

Frontal midline (FM) theta (4–8 Hz) reactivity to unexpected social rejection seems to be an important correlate of a neural threat-detection system. Neurovisceral integration theory proposes that the functioning of such systems is indexed by heart rate variability (HRV). Here, we tested this by examining whether baseline HRV predicts FM-theta reactivity to unexpected rejection feedback. Additionally, we examined whether this alleged heart-brain connection differs based on individual differences in personality and behavioral constructs relevant to social threat sensitivity. Female undergraduates (n = 149; mean age = 19.7 years) performed the social-judgment paradigm, where they communicated their expectations about being liked/disliked by unfamiliar peers who had allegedly evaluated them, and received peer-feedback indicating social acceptance/rejection. We used community structure analysis to subtract subgroups, based on self-esteem, social feedback expectations, and response speed of providing expectations. Results provided evidence of two distinct subgroups: optimistic vs. pessimistic in light of social threat. Baseline HRV did not predict FM-theta reactivity to unexpected rejection, and this relationship was not modulated by the subgroups. Both subgroups showed a significant FM-theta power increase following unexpected rejection. Additionally, the optimistic subgroup was uniquely characterized by a FM-theta power increase following rejection (as against acceptance) feedback. Supporting prior studies, our results suggest that enhanced FM-theta signals the need for cognitive control when faced with unexpected outcomes, and extend this by suggesting that differences in social threat sensitivity may determine whether an outcome is deemed meaningful enough to signal the need for cognitive control.

Valence-Based Biases in News Selection

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Stuart Soroka ◽  
Lauren Guggenheim ◽  
Dominic Valentino
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Recent Work ◽  
Online Game ◽  
Level Variation ◽  
Positive Information ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Learning Biases ◽  
Selection Decisions ◽  
News Selection

Abstract. Recent work highlights individual-level variation in negativity biases in news selection. There has, however, been limited work exploring the source of this individual-level variation. This study considers predispositions in information processing as a source of difference in news selection. We explore individual differences in learning biases identified using Hot Rod, a new purpose-built online game. Asymmetries in respondents’ learning of negative and positive information in Hot Rod are correlated with news selection decisions. It thus appears that valence-based differences in news consumption are at least partly a function of the same biases that govern learning and information processing more broadly.

scholarly journals The Bi-Dimensional Rejection Taxonomy: Organizing Responses to Social Rejection along Antisocial–Prosocial and Engaged–Disengaged Dimensions

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naoyuki Sunami ◽  
Megan Ann Nadzan ◽  
Lisa M Jaremka
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Social Rejection ◽  
Situational Factors ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Social Responses ◽  
Form And Function ◽  
And Function ◽  
Interpersonal Responses ◽  
New Framework

Interpersonal responses to social rejection vary widely in form and function. Existing theories of social rejection have exclusively focused on organizing these responses on a single antisocial–prosocial dimension. Accumulating evidence suggests a gap in this approach: variability in social responses to rejection cannot solely be explained by the antisocial–prosocial dimension alone. To fill this gap, we propose the bi-dimensional rejection taxonomy, consisting of the antisocial–prosocial x-axis and engaged-disengaged y-axis, a novel contribution to the literature. We demonstrate that both the x- and y-axes are necessary for understanding interpersonal responses to rejection and avoiding erroneous conclusions. We also show how this new framework allows researchers to generate more nuanced and accurate hypotheses about how people respond when rejected. We further demonstrate how existing research about individual differences and situational factors that predict responses to rejection can be viewed in a new light within the bi-dimensional rejection taxonomy. We conclude by suggesting how the taxonomy inspires innovative questions for future research, including understanding spontaneous responses and neurophysiological markers.

The challenge of accounting for individual differences in folk-economic beliefs

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin C. Ruisch ◽  
Rajen A. Anderson ◽  
David A. Pizarro
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Individual Variation ◽  
Political Ideologies ◽  
Economic Beliefs ◽  
Existing Data

AbstractWe argue that existing data on folk-economic beliefs (FEBs) present challenges to Boyer & Petersen's model. Specifically, the widespread individual variation in endorsement of FEBs casts doubt on the claim that humans are evolutionarily predisposed towards particular economic beliefs. Additionally, the authors' model cannot account for the systematic covariance between certain FEBs, such as those observed in distinct political ideologies.

Individual differences, social attention, and the history of the social motivation hypotheses of autism

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter C. Mundy
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Early Development ◽  
Emotional Development ◽  
Social Motivation ◽  
Social Attention ◽  
Social Emotional Development ◽  
Social Emotional ◽  
Precise Understanding ◽  
The Social ◽  
History Of

Abstract The stereotype of people with autism as unresponsive or uninterested in other people was prominent in the 1980s. However, this view of autism has steadily given way to recognition of important individual differences in the social-emotional development of affected people and a more precise understanding of the possible role social motivation has in their early development.

Elaborating the role of reflection and individual differences in the study of folk-economic beliefs

2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Arceneaux
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Evolutionary History ◽  
Behavioral Responses ◽  
History Of ◽  
Economic Beliefs

AbstractIntuitions guide decision-making, and looking to the evolutionary history of humans illuminates why some behavioral responses are more intuitive than others. Yet a place remains for cognitive processes to second-guess intuitive responses – that is, to be reflective – and individual differences abound in automatic, intuitive processing as well.

Inter-individual variation shapes the human microbiome

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily F. Wissel ◽  
Leigh K. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Individual Variation ◽  
Human Microbiome ◽  
Individual Variability ◽  
Microbiota Composition ◽  
Target Article ◽  
Microbiome Research

Abstract The target article suggests inter-individual variability is a weakness of microbiota-gut-brain (MGB) research, but we discuss why it is actually a strength. We comment on how accounting for individual differences can help researchers systematically understand the observed variance in microbiota composition, interpret null findings, and potentially improve the efficacy of therapeutic treatments in future clinical microbiome research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document