Science of Emotion and Sensibility (감성과학)

Korean Society for Emotion and Sensibility (한국감성과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Voxel-wise Mapping of Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Impression Formation

  • Jeesung Ahn (Department of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania) ;
  • Yoonjin Nah (Department of Psychology, Yonsei University) ;
  • Inwhan Ko (Department of Psychology, Yonsei University) ;
  • Sanghoon Han (Department of Psychology, Yonsei University)
  • Received : 2022.06.17
  • Accepted : 2022.09.05
  • Published : 2022.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Social interactions often involve encountering inconsistent information about social others. We conducted a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study to comprehensively investigate voxel-wise temporal dynamics showing how impressions are anchored and/or adjusted in response to inconsistent social information. The participants performed a social impression task inside an fMRI scanner in which they were shown a male face, together with a series of four adjectives that described the depicted person's personality traits, successively presented beneath the image of the face. Participants were asked to rate their impressions of the person at the end of each trial on a scale of 1 to 8 (where 1 is most negative and 8 is most positive). We established two hypothetical models that represented two temporal patterns of voxel activity: Model 1 featured decreasing patterns of activity towards the end of each trial, anchoring impressions to initially presented information, and Model 2 showed increasing patterns of activity toward the end of each trial, where impressions were being adjusted using new and inconsistent information. Our data-driven model fitting analyses showed that the temporal activity patterns of voxels within the ventral anterior cingulate cortex, medial orbitofrontal cortex, posterior cingulate cortex, amygdala, and fusiform gyrus fit Model 1 (i.e., they were more involved in anchoring first impressions) better than they did Model 2 (i.e., showing impression adjustment). Conversely, voxel-wise neural activity within dorsal ACC and lateral OFC fit Model 2 better than it did Model 1, as it was more likely to be involved in processing new, inconsistent information and adjusting impressions in response. Our novel approach to model fitting analysis replicated previous impression-related neuroscientific findings, furthering the understanding of neural and temporal dynamics of impression processing, particularly with reference to functionally segmenting each region of interest based on relative involvement in impression anchoring as opposed to adjustment.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2020S1A5A2A03042694).

References

  1. Ames, D. L., & Fiske, S. T. (2013). Outcome dependency alters the neural substrates of impression formation. NeuroImage, 83, 599-608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.07.001
  2. Anderson, N. H. (1968). Likableness ratings of 555 personality-trait words. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(3), 272-279.  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0025907
  3. Baron, S. G., Gobbini, M. I., Engell, A. D., & Todorov, A. (2011). Amygdala and dorsomedial prefrontal cortex responses to appearance-based and behavior-based person impressions. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 6(5), 572-581. DOI: 10.1093/scan/nsq086 
  4. Bechara, A., Damasio, H., & Damasio, A. R. (2000). Emotion, decision making and the orbitofrontal cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 10(3), 295-307.  https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/10.3.295
  5. Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(5), 752. 
  6. Chaiken, S., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Heuristic and systematic information processing within and beyond the persuasion context. Unintended Thought, 212, 212-252. 
  7. DeBruine, L. M., & Jones, B. C. (2017). Face Research Lab London Set. DOI: 10.6084/M9.FIGSHARE.5047666.V2 
  8. Egner, T., Etkin, A., Gale, S., & Hirsch, J. (2008). Dissociable neural systems resolve conflict from emotional versus nonemotional distracters. Cerebral Cortex, 18(6), 1475-1484. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhm179 
  9. Elliott, R., Agnew, Z., & Deakin, J. F. (2010). Hedonic and informational functions of the human orbitofrontal cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 20(1), 198-204. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/bhp092 
  10. Fairhall, S. L., & Ishai, A. (2007). Effective connectivity within the distributed cortical network for face perception. Cerebral cortex, 17(10), 2400-2406.  https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhl148
  11. Foley, E., Rippon, G., Thai, N. J., Longe, O., & Senior, C. (2012). Dynamic facial expressions evoke distinct activation in the face perception network: A connectivity analysis study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24(2), 507-520. 
  12. Freeman, J. B., Schiller, D., Rule, N. O., & Ambady, N. (2010). The neural origins of superficial and individuated judgments about ingroup and outgroup members. Human Brain Mapping, 31(1), 150-159. DOI: 10.1002/hbm.20852 
  13. Gangopadhyay, P., Chawla, M., Dal Monte, O., & Chang, S. W. (2021). Prefrontal-amygdala circuits in social decision-making. Nature Neuroscience, 24(1), 5-18.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-020-00738-9
  14. Gao, J. S., Huth, A. G., Lescroart, M. D., & Gallant, J. L. (2015). Pycortex: An interactive surface visualizer for fMRI. Frontiers in Neuroinformation, 9, 23. DOI: 10.3389/fninf.2015.00023 
  15. Grill-Spector, K., Knouf, N., & Kanwisher, N. (2004). The fusiform face area subserves face perception, not generic within-category identification. Nature Neuroscience, 7(5), 555-562. DOI: 10.1038/nn1224 
  16. Grill-Spector, K., Weiner, K. S., Kay, K., & Gomez, J. (2017). The functional neuroanatomy of human face perception. Annual Review of Vision Science, 3, 167. 
  17. Hampshire, A., Chaudhry, A. M., Owen, A. M., & Roberts, A. C. (2012). Dissociable roles for lateral orbitofrontal cortex and lateral prefrontal cortex during preference driven reversal learning. Neuroimage, 59(4), 4102-4112. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.10.072 
  18. Herrington, J. D., Taylor, J. M., Grupe, D. W., Curby, K. M., & Schultz, R. T. (2011). Bidirectional communication between amygdala and fusiform gyrus during facial recognition. Neuroimage, 56(4), 2348-2355.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.03.072
  19. Hogarth, R. M., & Einhorn, H. J. (1992). Order effects in belief updating: The belief adjustment model. Cognitive Psychology, 24(1), 1-55.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(92)90002-J
  20. Huth, A. G., de Heer, W. A., Griffiths, T. L., Theunissen, F. E., & Gallant, J. L. (2016). Natural speech reveals the semantic maps that tile human cerebral cortex. Nature, 532(7600), 453-458. DOI: 10.1038/nature17637 
  21. Huth, A. G., Nishimoto, S., Vu, A. T., & Gallant, J. L. (2012). A continuous semantic space describes the representation of thousands of object and action categories across the human brain. Neuron, 76(6), 1210-1224. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.10.014 
  22. Iidaka, T., Harada, T., & Sadato, N. (2011). Forming a negative impression of another person correlates with activation in medial prefrontal cortex and amygdala. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 6(4), 516-525. DOI: 10.1093/scan/nsq072 
  23. Kanwisher, N., McDermott, J., & Chun, M. M. (1997). The fusiform face area: A module in human extrastriate cortex specialized for face perception. Journal of Neuroscience, 17(11), 4302-4311.  https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.17-11-04302.1997
  24. Kim, H., Choi, M. J., & Jang, I. J. (2012). Lateral OFC activity predicts decision bias due to first impressions during ultimatum games. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24(2), 428-439. DOI: 10.1162/jocn_a_00136 
  25. Kolling, N., Wittmann, M. K., Behrens, T. E., Boorman, E. D., Mars, R. B., & Rushworth, M. F. (2016). Value, search, persistence and model updating in anterior cingulate cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 19(10), 1280-1285. DOI: 10.1038/nn.4382 
  26. Liu, X., Powell, D. K., Wang, H., Gold, B. T., Corbly, C. R., & Joseph, J. E. (2007). Functional dissociation in frontal and striatal areas for processing of positive and negative reward information. Journal of Neuroscience, 27(17), 4587-4597. 
  27. Ma, N., Baetens, K., Vandekerckhove, M., Kestemont, J., Fias, W., & Van Overwalle, F. (2014). Traits are represented in the medial prefrontal cortex: An fMRI adaptation study. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 9(8), 1185-1192. DOI: 10.1093/scan/nst098 
  28. Ma, N., Baetens, K., Vandekerckhove, M., Van der Cruyssen, L., & Van Overwalle, F. (2014). Dissociation of a trait and a valence representation in the mPFC. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 9(10), 1506-1514. DOI: 10.1093/scan/nst143 
  29. Ma, N., Vandekerckhove, M., Baetens, K., Van Overwalle, F., Seurinck, R., & Fias, W. (2012). Inconsistencies in spontaneous and intentional trait inferences. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 7(8), 937-950.  https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsr064
  30. Mansouri, F. A., Buckley, M. J., & Tanaka, K. (2014). The essential role of primate orbitofrontal cortex in conflict-induced executive control adjustment. Journal of Neuroscience, 34(33), 11016-11031. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1637-14.2014 
  31. Mende-Siedlecki, P. (2018). Changing our minds: The neural bases of dynamic impression updating. Current Opinion in Psychology, 24, 72-76.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.08.007
  32. Mende-Siedlecki, P., Cai, Y., & Todorov, A. (2012). The neural dynamics of updating person impressions. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 8(6), 623-631.  https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nss040
  33. Mitchell, J. P., Neil Macrae, C., & Banaji, M. R. (2005). Forming impressions of people versus inanimate objects: social-cognitive processing in the medial prefrontal cortex. Neuroimage, 26(1), 251-257. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.01.031 
  34. Mohanty, A., Engels, A. S., Herrington, J. D., Heller, W., Ho, M. R., Banich, M. T., Webb, A. G., Warren, S. L., & Miller, G. A. (2007). Differential engagement of anterior cingulate cortex subdivisions for cognitive and emotional function. Psychophysiology, 44(3), 343-351. DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00515.x 
  35. Mumford, J. A., Turner, B. O., Ashby, F. G., & Poldrack, R. A. (2012). Deconvolving BOLD activation in event-related designs for multivoxel pattern classification analyses. Neuroimage, 59(3), 2636-2643. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.08.076 
  36. Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (1999). Hypothesis-consistent testing and semantic priming in the anchoring paradigm: A selective accessibility model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35(2), 136-164.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1998.1364
  37. Naselaris, T., Olman, C. A., Stansbury, D. E., Ugurbil, K., & Gallant, J. L. (2015). A voxel-wise encoding model for early visual areas decodes mental images of remembered scenes. Neuroimage, 105, 215-228. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.10.018 
  38. O'Doherty, J., Winston, J., Critchley, H., Perrett, D., Burt, D. M., & Dolan, R. J. (2003). Beauty in a smile: The role of medial orbitofrontal cortex in facial attractiveness. Neuropsychologia, 41(2), 147-155.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0028-3932(02)00145-8
  39. O'Doherty, J., Kringelbach, M. L., Rolls, E. T., Hornak, J., & Andrews, C. (2001). Abstract reward and punishment representations in the human orbitofrontal cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 4(1), 95-102.  https://doi.org/10.1038/82959
  40. Pearson, J. M., Heilbronner, S. R., Barack, D. L., Hayden, B. Y., & Platt, M. L. (2011). Posterior cingulate cortex: Adapting behavior to a changing world. Trends in Cognitive Science, 15(4), 143-151. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2011.02.002 
  41. Schiller, D., Freeman, J. B., Mitchell, J. P., Uleman, J. S., & Phelps, E. A. (2009). A neural mechanism of first impressions. Nature Neuroscience, 12(4), 508-514. DOI: 10.1038/nn.2278 
  42. Sergent, J., Ohta, S., & MacDonald, B. (1992). Functional neuroanatomy of face and object processing: A positron emission tomography study. Brain, 115(1), 15-36. DOI: 10.1093/brain/115.1.15 
  43. Shenhav, A., Cohen, J. D., & Botvinick, M. M. (2016). Dorsal anterior cingulate cortex and the value of control. Nature Neuroscience, 19(10), 1286-1291. DOI: 10.1038/nn.4384 
  44. Somerville, L. H., Heatherton, T. F., & Kelley, W. M. (2006). Anterior cingulate cortex responds differentially to expectancy violation and social rejection. Nature Neuroscience, 9(8), 1007-1008. DOI: 10.1038/nn1728 
  45. Sung, Y. S., Cho, K., Kim, D. Y., & Kim, H. (2010). Difference in visual attention during the assessment of facial attractiveness and trustworthiness. Science of Emotion & Sensibility, 13(3), 533-540. 
  46. Todorov, A., Mende-Siedlecki, P., & Dotsch, R. (2013). Social judgments from faces. Current Opinions in Neurobiology, 23(3), 373-380. DOI: 10.1016/j.conb.2012.12.010 
  47. Turner, B. M., & Schley, D. R. (2016). The anchor integration model: A descriptive model of anchoring effects. Cognitive Psychology, 90, 1-47. DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2016.07.003 
  48. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124-1131. DOI:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 
  49. Tzourio-Mazoyera, N., Landeau, B., Papathanassiou, D., Crivello, F., Etard, O., Delcroix, N., Mazoyer, B., & Joliot, M. (2002). Automated anatomical labeling of activations in SPM using a macroscopic anatomical parcellation of the MNI MRI singlesubject brain. Neuroimage, 15(1), 273-289. DOI: 10.1006/nimg.2001.0978 
  50. Uleman, J. S., Adil Saribay, S., & Gonzalez, C. M. (2008). Spontaneous inferences, implicit impressions, and implicit theories. Annual Review in Psychology, 59, 329-360. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093707