title: Cognitive control and individual differences in economic ultimatum decision-making.
abstract: Much publicity has been given to the fact that people's economic decisions often deviate from the rational predictions of standard economic models. In the classic ultimatum game, for example, most people turn down financial gains by rejecting unequal monetary splits. The present study points to neglected individual differences in this debate. After participants played the ultimatum game we tested for individual differences in cognitive control capacity of the most and least economic responders. The key finding was that people who were higher in cognitive control, as measured by behavioral (Go/No-Go performance) and neural (No-Go N2 amplitude) markers, did tend to behave more in line with the standard models and showed increased acceptance of unequal splits. Hence, the cognitively highest scoring decision-makers were more likely to maximize their monetary payoffs and adhere to the standard economic predictions. Findings question popular claims with respect to the rejection of standard economic models and the irrationality of human economic decision-making.
authors.affiliation: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, University of Toulouse, Toulouse, France. Wim.Deneys@univ-tlse2.fr
authors.forename: Wim
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: De Neys
authors.forename: Nikolay
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Novitskiy
authors.forename: Leen
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Geeraerts
authors.forename: Jennifer
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Ramautar
authors.forename: Johan
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Wagemans
mesh_terms: D003071:Cognition / Q000502:physiology*; D003657:Decision Making; D005717:Games, Experimental; D006801:Humans; D007206:Individuality; D018803:Models, Economic
references.citation: Neuropsychologia. 2010 Jun;48(7):2198-204
references.pmid: 20403367
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2007 Oct;10(10):1246-7
references.pmid: 17828253
references.citation: Science. 2006 Nov 3;314(5800):829-32
references.pmid: 17023614
references.citation: Behav Brain Sci. 2000 Oct;23(5):645-65; discussion 665-726
references.pmid: 11301544
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 2001 Dec;130(4):621-640
references.pmid: 11757872
references.citation: Science. 2003 Jun 13;300(5626):1755-8
references.pmid: 12805551
references.citation: Behav Brain Funct. 2006 Oct 18;2:35
references.pmid: 17049091
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2010 Mar;21(3):337-42
references.pmid: 20424065
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2007 Jan 24;27(4):951-6
references.pmid: 17251437
references.citation: Int J Psychophysiol. 2007 Jan;63(1):25-38
references.pmid: 16919346
references.citation: Clin Neurophysiol. 2004 Jun;115(6):1320-31
references.pmid: 15134699
references.citation: Science. 2007 Oct 5;318(5847):107-9
references.pmid: 17916736
references.citation: Psychiatry Res. 2003 Apr 1;122(3):169-84
references.pmid: 12694891
references.citation: Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2003 Mar;3(1):17-26
references.pmid: 12822595
references.citation: Behav Brain Res. 2008 Jul 19;190(2):218-23
references.pmid: 18406476
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2004 Apr;8(4):170-7
references.pmid: 15050513
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2006 May;17(5):428-33
references.pmid: 16683931
references.citation: Cereb Cortex. 2008 Sep;18(9):1987-90
references.pmid: 18158325
references.citation: Science. 2008 Jun 27;320(5884):1739
references.pmid: 18535210
references.citation: Psychophysiology. 2008 Jan;45(1):11-9
references.pmid: 17910730
references.citation: Neurosci Lett. 2007 Jun 4;419(3):236-41
references.pmid: 17466456
references.citation: Exp Brain Res. 2006 Mar;169(4):564-8
references.pmid: 16489438
references.citation: Neuropsychologia. 2006;44(11):2139-48
references.pmid: 16310813
references.citation: Science. 2009 Feb 27;323(5918):1222-6
references.pmid: 19251631
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2008 Apr;19(4):339-47
references.pmid: 18399886
references.citation: Exp Psychol. 2006;53(2):123-31
references.pmid: 16909937
references.citation: Neuroreport. 2005 Nov 7;16(16):1849-52
references.pmid: 16237340
references.citation: Science. 2000 Sep 8;289(5485):1773-5
references.pmid: 10976075
references.citation: Psychophysiology. 2010 Nov;47(6):1142-50
references.pmid: 20409015
references.citation: Science. 2003 Jun 13;300(5626):1673-5
references.pmid: 12805527
references.citation: Acta Psychol (Amst). 1999 Apr;101(2-3):267-91
references.pmid: 10344188