重度酒精使用障碍的不公平、敏感与公平:来自最后通牒游戏的洞察

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Mado Gautier , Damien Brevers , Arthur Pabst , Christophe Geus , Pierre Maurage
{"title":"重度酒精使用障碍的不公平、敏感与公平:来自最后通牒游戏的洞察","authors":"Mado Gautier ,&nbsp;Damien Brevers ,&nbsp;Arthur Pabst ,&nbsp;Christophe Geus ,&nbsp;Pierre Maurage","doi":"10.1016/j.addbeh.2025.108331","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Severe alcohol use disorder (SAUD) is characterized by social interaction difficulties that play a key role in the persistence of this addictive state. Biased social decision-making might underpin such interpersonal problems. Previous studies exploring social decision-making in SAUD used the ultimatum game – an economic game evaluating sensitivity to unfairness (for the responder) and equity (for the proposer) – and showed increased unfairness sensitivity in SAUD. However, these studies used one-shot designs that are not representative of real-life interactions and focused only on responders, letting much of the phenomenon unexplored.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Thirty-five recently detoxified patients with SAUD and 34 matched control participants played four iterated ultimatum games, with variations according to the role (responder <em>vs.</em> proposer) and strategy used by their virtual opponent (fair/easy <em>vs.</em> unfair/difficult). Participants then completed social cognition tasks and psychopathological questionnaires.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>As responders, patients with SAUD did not reject fair or unfair offers more often than controls, which contradicts the unfairness sensitivity previously highlighted in one-shot ultimatum games. As proposers, patients with SAUD made more generous offers than controls and did not adapt to their opponent’s strategy, which resulted in poorer economic outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Patients with SAUD do not display an unfairness sensitivity but are less able to adapt to their opponent, which has detrimental consequences, namely poorer outcomes. They behave differently during one-shot and repeated interactions, probably because – due to their social cognition impairments – they need more time to understand their opponent and overcome their <em>a priori</em> social biases.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7155,"journal":{"name":"Addictive behaviors","volume":"167 ","pages":"Article 108331"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unfairness sensitivity and equity in severe alcohol use disorder: Insights from the ultimatum game\",\"authors\":\"Mado Gautier ,&nbsp;Damien Brevers ,&nbsp;Arthur Pabst ,&nbsp;Christophe Geus ,&nbsp;Pierre Maurage\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.addbeh.2025.108331\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Severe alcohol use disorder (SAUD) is characterized by social interaction difficulties that play a key role in the persistence of this addictive state. Biased social decision-making might underpin such interpersonal problems. Previous studies exploring social decision-making in SAUD used the ultimatum game – an economic game evaluating sensitivity to unfairness (for the responder) and equity (for the proposer) – and showed increased unfairness sensitivity in SAUD. However, these studies used one-shot designs that are not representative of real-life interactions and focused only on responders, letting much of the phenomenon unexplored.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Thirty-five recently detoxified patients with SAUD and 34 matched control participants played four iterated ultimatum games, with variations according to the role (responder <em>vs.</em> proposer) and strategy used by their virtual opponent (fair/easy <em>vs.</em> unfair/difficult). Participants then completed social cognition tasks and psychopathological questionnaires.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>As responders, patients with SAUD did not reject fair or unfair offers more often than controls, which contradicts the unfairness sensitivity previously highlighted in one-shot ultimatum games. As proposers, patients with SAUD made more generous offers than controls and did not adapt to their opponent’s strategy, which resulted in poorer economic outcomes.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Patients with SAUD do not display an unfairness sensitivity but are less able to adapt to their opponent, which has detrimental consequences, namely poorer outcomes. They behave differently during one-shot and repeated interactions, probably because – due to their social cognition impairments – they need more time to understand their opponent and overcome their <em>a priori</em> social biases.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7155,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Addictive behaviors\",\"volume\":\"167 \",\"pages\":\"Article 108331\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Addictive behaviors\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306460325000905\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Addictive behaviors","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306460325000905","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的重度酒精使用障碍(SAUD)的特征是社交互动困难,这在这种成瘾状态的持续中起着关键作用。有偏见的社会决策可能是这种人际关系问题的根源。先前的研究使用最后通牒游戏——一种评估对不公平(对于回应者)和公平(对于提议者)敏感性的经济游戏——来探索沙特人的社会决策,并显示沙特人的不公平敏感性增加。然而,这些研究使用了一次性设计,不能代表现实生活中的互动,只关注响应者,让很多现象未被探索。方法35名新近解毒的沙特阿拉伯患者和34名匹配的对照组参与者进行了四次反复的最后通牒游戏,根据角色(响应者vs提议者)和虚拟对手使用的策略(公平/容易vs不公平/困难)进行了变化。参与者随后完成了社会认知任务和精神病理问卷。结果作为应答者,SAUD患者拒绝公平或不公平待遇的频率并不比对照组高,这与之前在一次最后通牒游戏中强调的不公平敏感性相矛盾。作为提议者,沙特患者的提议比对照组更慷慨,并且不适应对手的策略,这导致了更差的经济结果。结论SAUD患者没有表现出不公平敏感性,但对对手的适应能力较差,这具有不利的后果,即较差的结果。他们在一次和多次的互动中表现不同,可能是因为他们的社会认知障碍,他们需要更多的时间来理解对手,克服先天的社会偏见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Unfairness sensitivity and equity in severe alcohol use disorder: Insights from the ultimatum game

Unfairness sensitivity and equity in severe alcohol use disorder: Insights from the ultimatum game

Objectives

Severe alcohol use disorder (SAUD) is characterized by social interaction difficulties that play a key role in the persistence of this addictive state. Biased social decision-making might underpin such interpersonal problems. Previous studies exploring social decision-making in SAUD used the ultimatum game – an economic game evaluating sensitivity to unfairness (for the responder) and equity (for the proposer) – and showed increased unfairness sensitivity in SAUD. However, these studies used one-shot designs that are not representative of real-life interactions and focused only on responders, letting much of the phenomenon unexplored.

Methods

Thirty-five recently detoxified patients with SAUD and 34 matched control participants played four iterated ultimatum games, with variations according to the role (responder vs. proposer) and strategy used by their virtual opponent (fair/easy vs. unfair/difficult). Participants then completed social cognition tasks and psychopathological questionnaires.

Results

As responders, patients with SAUD did not reject fair or unfair offers more often than controls, which contradicts the unfairness sensitivity previously highlighted in one-shot ultimatum games. As proposers, patients with SAUD made more generous offers than controls and did not adapt to their opponent’s strategy, which resulted in poorer economic outcomes.

Conclusions

Patients with SAUD do not display an unfairness sensitivity but are less able to adapt to their opponent, which has detrimental consequences, namely poorer outcomes. They behave differently during one-shot and repeated interactions, probably because – due to their social cognition impairments – they need more time to understand their opponent and overcome their a priori social biases.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Addictive behaviors
Addictive behaviors 医学-药物滥用
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
4.50%
发文量
283
审稿时长
46 days
期刊介绍: Addictive Behaviors is an international peer-reviewed journal publishing high quality human research on addictive behaviors and disorders since 1975. The journal accepts submissions of full-length papers and short communications on substance-related addictions such as the abuse of alcohol, drugs and nicotine, and behavioral addictions involving gambling and technology. We primarily publish behavioral and psychosocial research but our articles span the fields of psychology, sociology, psychiatry, epidemiology, social policy, medicine, pharmacology and neuroscience. While theoretical orientations are diverse, the emphasis of the journal is primarily empirical. That is, sound experimental design combined with valid, reliable assessment and evaluation procedures are a requisite for acceptance. However, innovative and empirically oriented case studies that might encourage new lines of inquiry are accepted as well. Studies that clearly contribute to current knowledge of etiology, prevention, social policy or treatment are given priority. Scholarly commentaries on topical issues, systematic reviews, and mini reviews are encouraged. We especially welcome multimedia papers that incorporate video or audio components to better display methodology or findings. Studies can also be submitted to Addictive Behaviors? companion title, the open access journal Addictive Behaviors Reports, which has a particular interest in ''non-traditional'', innovative and empirically-oriented research such as negative/null data papers, replication studies, case reports on novel treatments, and cross-cultural research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信