Electrophysiological correlates of why humans deviate from rational decision-making: A registered replication study.

Abstract

In contrast to rational choice theory predicting humans to optimize expected utilities of choices, humans deviate from rational behavior in decision-making paradigms. Hewig et al. (2011) explored affective correlates of decision-making in the ultimatum game (UG) and the dictator game (DG). They found that feedback-related negativity (FRN), subjective valence ratings, and autonomic nervous system activity predicted rejection of monetary offers. This registered replication aimed to validate and extend these findings. Although behavioral patterns and results of subjective ratings closely matched the original study, not all psychophysiological effects were successfully replicated. Firstly, we could not replicate the reported effects of autonomic nervous system activity. Secondly, a quadratic instead of the originally proposed linear relation between the offer and the FRN emerged, possibly driven by the offer evaluation in economic games and the rewarding anticipation of successful punishment for low offers. Thirdly, P3 amplitudes mirrored the quadratic offer response pattern, generally peaking for the lowest offer. In contrast to the original study, P3 responses were larger in the UG compared with the DG. Finally, our findings indicate that participant-related higher midfrontal theta activation predicted lower acceptance behavior in the UG, with a systematic dampening effect for fairer offers. This highlights cognitive control as a crucial mechanism in economic decision-making to overcome behavioral defaults. Overall, our results conceptually support the original conclusion that decision-making in economic games is non-rational and dependent on the objective situation as well as emotional and neural markers, though not precisely as suggested by Hewig et al. (2011).