Narcissism and risky decisions: a neurophysiological approach

Narcissists are prone to risky decision-making, but why? This study tested-via behavioral and event-related potential (ERP) measures-two accounts: deficiencies in error monitoring and deficiencies in action updating. High and low narcissists were a engaged in a monetary gambling task by choosing between a high-risk and a low-risk option while the electroencephalogram (EEG) was being recorded. Two ERP components relevant to outcome evaluation-feedback-related negativity (FRN) and P3-were analyzed, with the FRN serving as an index of error monitoring and the P3 as an index of action updating. Generally, high and low narcissists differed in the high-risk condition but not in the low-risk condition. At the behavioral level, high (vs low) narcissists made riskier decisions following high-risk decision outcomes, which was in line with past findings; at the neurophysiological level, while no FRN difference emerged between high and low narcissists, the outcome valence effect (positive vs negative) on the P3 was stronger among low narcissists than high narcissists following high-risk decision outcomes. One possible interpretation of the results is that narcissism is associated with reduced action updating. The findings contribute to the understanding of narcissistic decision-making and self-regulation.</p

Influences of State and Trait Affect on Behavior, Feedback-Related Negativity, and P3b in the Ultimatum Game

The present study investigates how different emotions can alter social bargaining behavior. An important paradigm to study social bargaining is the Ultimatum Game. There, a proposer gets a pot of money and has to offer part of it to a responder. If the responder accepts, both players get the money as proposed by the proposer. If he rejects, none of the players gets anything. Rational choice models would predict that responders accept all offers above 0. However, evidence shows that responders typically reject a large proportion of all unfair offers. We analyzed participants’ behavior when they played the Ultimatum Game as responders and simultaneously collected electroencephalogram data in order to quantify the feedback-related negativity and P3b components. We induced state affect (momentarily emotions unrelated to the task) via short movie clips and measured trait affect (longer-lasting emotional dispositions) via questionnaires. State happiness led to increased acceptance rates of very unfair offers. Regarding neurophysiology, we found that unfair offers elicited larger feedback-related negativity amplitudes than fair offers. Additionally, an interaction of state and trait affect occurred: high trait negative affect (subsuming a variety of aversive mood states) led to increased feedback-related negativity amplitudes when participants were in an angry mood, but not if they currently experienced fear or happiness. We discuss that increased rumination might be responsible for this result, which might not occur, however, when people experience happiness or fear. Apart from that, we found that fair offers elicited larger P3b components than unfair offers, which might reflect increased pleasure in response to fair offers. Moreover, high trait negative affect was associated with decreased P3b amplitudes, potentially reflecting decreased motivation to engage in activities. We discuss implications of our results in the light of theories and research on depression and anxiety