CIVIL ENGINEERING 365 ALL ABOUT CIVIL ENGINEERING


  • 1.

    Henrich, J. et al. ‘Economic man’ in cross-cultural perspective: Behavioral experiments in 15 small-scale societies. Behav. Brain. Sci. 28, 795–815 (2005).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 2.

    Warneken, F. & Tomasello, M. Varieties of altruism in children and chimpanzees. Trends Cogn. Sci. 13, 397–402 (2009).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 3.

    Van Bavel, J. J. et al. Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response. Nat. Hum. Behav. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0884-z (2020).

    Article 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 4.

    Steinbeis, N., Bernhardt, B. C. & Singer, T. Impulse control and underlying functions of the left DLPFC mediate age-related and age-independent individual differences in strategic social behavior. Neuron 73, 1040–1051 (2012).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 5.

    Declerck, C. H. & Boone, C. Neuroeconomics of Prosocial Behavior (Academic Press, New York, 2015).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 6.

    Schroeder, D. A. & Graziano, W. G. The Oxford Handbook of Prosocial Behavior (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2015).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 7.

    Sul, S. et al. Spatial gradient in value representation along the medial prefrontal cortex reflects individual differences in prosociality. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112, 7851 (2015).

    ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 8.

    Steinbeis, N. The role of self–other distinction in understanding others’ mental and emotional states: neurocognitive mechanisms in children and adults. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. Biol. Sci. 371, 2 (2016).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 9.

    Do, K. T., Guassi Moreira, J. F. & Telzer, E. H. But is helping you worth the risk? Defining prosocial risk taking in adolescence. Dev. Cogn. Neurosci. 25, 260–271 (2017).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 10.

    Hu, X., Xu, Z. & Mai, X. Social value orientation modulates the processing of outcome evaluation involving others. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 12, 1730–1739 (2017).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 11.

    Kleinert, T. et al. The trust game for couples (TGC): A new standardized paradigm to assess trust in romantic relationships. PLoS ONE 15, e0230776 (2020).

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 12.

    Capraro, V., Jordan, J. J. & Rand, D. G. Heuristics guide the implementation of social preferences in one-shot Prisoner’s Dilemma experiments. Sci. Rep. 4, 6790 (2014).

    ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 13.

    Biziou-van-Pol, L., Haenen, J., Novaro, A., Liberman, A. O. & Capraro, V. Does telling white lies signal pro-social preferences? Judgm. Decis. Mak. 10, 538–548 (2015).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 14.

    Peysakhovich, A., Nowak, M. A. & Rand, D. G. Humans display a ‘cooperative phenotype’ that is domain general and temporally stable. Nat. Commun. 5, 4939 (2014).

    ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 15.

    Baumgartner, T., Schiller, B., Hill, C. & Knoch, D. Impartiality in humans is predicted by brain structure of dorsomedial prefrontal cortex. Neuroimage 81, 317–324 (2013).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 16.

    Schiller, B., Gianotti, L. R., Nash, K. & Knoch, D. Individual differences in inhibitory control–relationship between baseline activation in lateral PFC and an electrophysiological index of response inhibition. Cereb. Cortex 24, 2430–2435 (2014).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 17.

    Schiller, B., Gianotti, L. R. R., Baumgartner, T. & Knoch, D. Theta resting EEG in the right TPJ is associated with individual differences in implicit intergroup bias. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 14, 281–289 (2019).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 18.

    Nash, K., Gianotti, L. R. R. & Knoch, D. A neural trait approach to exploring individual differences in social preferences. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 8, 2 (2015).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 19.

    Lehmann, D. Principles of spatial analysis. In Handbook of electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology. Methods of analysis of brain electrical and magnetic signals (eds Gevins, A. S. & Remond, A.) 309–354 (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1987).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 20.

    Michel, C. M. & Koenig, T. EEG microstates as a tool for studying the temporal dynamics of whole-brain neuronal networks: A review. Neuroimage 180, 577–593 (2018).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 21.

    Gianotti, L. R. R., Lobmaier, J. S., Calluso, C., Dahinden, F. M. & Knoch, D. Theta resting EEG in TPJ/pSTS is associated with individual differences in the feeling of being looked at. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 13, 216–223 (2018).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 22.

    Hahn, T. et al. How to trust a perfect stranger: predicting initial trust behavior from resting-state brain-electrical connectivity. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 10, 809–813 (2015).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 23.

    Gianotti, L. R. R., Dahinden, F. M., Baumgartner, T. & Knoch, D. Understanding individual differences in domain-general prosociality: A resting EEG study. Brain Topogr. 32, 118–126 (2019).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 24.

    Koenig, T., Studer, D., Hubl, D., Melie, L. & Strik, W. K. Brain connectivity at different time-scales measured with EEG. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. Biol. Sci. 360, 1015–1023 (2005).

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 25.

    Mueller, E. M. & Pizzagalli, D. A. One-year-old fear memories rapidly activate human fusiform gyrus. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 11, 308–316 (2015).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 26.

    Schiller, B. et al. Clocking the social mind by identifying mental processes in the IAT with electrical neuroimaging. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 113, 2786–2791 (2016).

    ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 27.

    Schiller, B., Koenig, T. & Heinrichs, M. Oxytocin modulates the temporal dynamics of resting EEG networks. Sci. Rep. 9, 13418 (2019).

    ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 28.

    Schiller, B., Domes, G. & Heinrichs, M. Oxytocin changes behavior and spatio-temporal brain dynamics underlying inter-group conflict in humans. Eur. Neuropsychopharmacol. 31, 119–130 (2020).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 29.

    Koenig, T. et al. Millisecond by millisecond, year by year: normative EEG microstates and developmental stages. Neuroimage 16, 41–48 (2002).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 30.

    Khanna, A., Pascual-Leone, A. & Farzan, F. Reliability of resting-state microstate features in electroencephalography. PLoS ONE 9, e114163 (2014).

    ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 31.

    Khanna, A., Pascual-Leone, A., Michel, C. M. & Farzan, F. Microstates in resting-state EEG: Current status and future directions. Neurosci. Biobehav. R. 49, 105–113 (2015).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 32.

    Bréchet, L. et al. Capturing the spatiotemporal dynamics of self-generated, task-initiated thoughts with EEG and fMRI. Neuroimage 194, 82–92 (2019).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 33.

    Zappasodi, F. et al. EEG microstates distinguish between cognitive components of fluid reasoning. Neuroimage 189, 560–573 (2019).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 34.

    Britz, J., Van De Ville, D. & Michel, C. M. BOLD correlates of EEG topography reveal rapid resting-state network dynamics. Neuroimage 52, 1162–1170 (2010).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 35.

    Custo, A., Vulliemoz, S., Grouiller, F., Van De Ville, D. & Michel, C. M. EEG source imaging of brain states using spatiotemporal regression. Neuroimage 96, 106–116 (2014).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 36.

    Custo, A. et al. Electroencephalographic resting-state networks: Source localization of microstates. Brain Connect. 7, 671–682 (2017).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 37.

    Seitzman, B. A. et al. Cognitive manipulation of brain electric microstates. Neuroimage 146, 533–543 (2017).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 38.

    Davis, M. H. Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 44, 113–126 (1983).

    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 39.

    Schmidt, P., Bamberg, S., Davidov, E., Herrmann, J. & Schwartz, S. H. Die Messung von Werten mit dem “Portraits Value Questionnaire”. Z. f. Sozialpsychol. 38, 261–275 (2007).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 40.

    Fehr, E. & Gächter, S. Cooperation and punishment in public goods experiments. Am. Econ. Rev. 90, 980–994 (2000).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 41.

    Murphy, R. O., Ackermann, K. A. & Handgraaf, M. Measuring social value orientation. Judgm. Decis. Mak. 6, 771–781 (2011).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 42.

    Rand, D. G., Greene, J. D. & Nowak, M. A. Spontaneous giving and calculated greed. Nature 489, 427–430 (2012).

    ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 43.

    Zaki, J. & Mitchell, J. P. Intuitive prosociality. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 22, 466–470 (2013).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 44.

    Carlson, R. W., Aknin, L. B. & Liotti, M. When is giving an impulse? An ERP investigation of intuitive prosocial behavior. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 11, 1121–1129 (2015).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 45.

    Krajbich, I., Bartling, B., Hare, T. & Fehr, E. Rethinking fast and slow based on a critique of reaction-time reverse inference. Nat. Commun. 6, 7455 (2015).

    ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 46.

    Brown, R. J. & Oakley, D. A. Hypnotic susceptibility and holistic/emotional styles of thinking. Contemp. Hypn. 15, 76–83 (1998).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 47.

    Katayama, H. et al. Classes of multichannel EEG microstates in light and deep hypnotic conditions. Brain Topogr. 20, 7–14 (2007).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 48.

    Croce, P., Zappasodi, F. & Capotosto, P. Offline stimulation of human parietal cortex differently affects resting EEG microstates. Sci. Rep. 8, 1287 (2018).

    ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 49.

    Milz, P., Pascual-Marqui, R. D., Achermann, P., Kochi, K. & Faber, P. L. The EEG microstate topography is predominantly determined by intracortical sources in the alpha band. Neuroimage 162, 353–361 (2017).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 50.

    Kinnunen, S. & Windmann, S. Dual-processing altruism. Front. Psychol. 4, 193 (2013).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 51.

    Norris, P. & Epstein, S. An experiential thinking style: Its facets and relations with objective and subjective criterion measures. J. Pers. 79, 1043–1080 (2011).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 52.

    Pacini, R. & Epstein, S. The relation of rational and experiential information processing styles to personality, basic beliefs, and the ratio-bias phenomenon. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 76, 972–987 (1999).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 53.

    Rand, D. G. et al. Social heuristics shape intuitive cooperation. Nat. Commun. 5, 3677 (2014).

    ADS 
    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 54.

    Schulz, J. F., Fischbacher, U., Thöni, C. & Utikal, V. Affect and fairness: Dictator games under cognitive load. J. Econ. Psychol. 41, 77–87 (2014).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 55.

    Bouwmeester, S. et al. Registered replication report: Rand, Greene, and Nowak (2012). Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 12, 527–542 (2017).

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 56.

    Camerer, C. F. et al. Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2, 637–644 (2018).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 57.

    Rand, D. G. Cooperation, fast and slow: Meta-analytic evidence for a theory of social heuristics and self-interested deliberation. Psychol. Sci. 27, 1192–1206 (2016).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 58.

    Kvarven, A. et al. The intuitive cooperation hypothesis revisited: a meta-analytic examination of effect size and between-study heterogeneity. Preprint at https://osf.io/preprints/metaarxiv/kvzg3/ (2020).

  • 59.

    Capraro, V. The dual-process approach to human sociality: A review. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.09948 (2019).

  • 60.

    Böhm, R., Rusch, H. & Baron, J. The psychology of intergroup conflict: A review of theories and measures. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2018.01.020 (2018).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 61.

    Hackel, L. M. & Zaki, J. Propagation of economic inequality through reciprocity and reputation. Psychol. Sci. 29, 604–613 (2018).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 62.

    Hortensius, R. & de Gelder, B. From empathy to apathy: The bystander effect revisited. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 27, 249–256 (2018).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 63.

    Hahn, T. et al. Reliance on functional resting-state network for stable task control predicts behavioral tendency for cooperation. Neuroimage 118, 231–236 (2015).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 64.

    Rudorf, S. et al. Intrinsic connectivity networks underlying individual differences in control-averse behavior. Hum. Brain Mapp. 39, 4857–4869 (2018).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 65.

    Brañas-Garza, P., Capraro, V. & Rascón-Ramírez, E. Gender differences in altruism on Mechanical Turk: Expectations and actual behaviour. Econ. Lett. 170, 19–23 (2018).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 66.

    Rand, D. G. Social dilemma cooperation (unlike Dictator Game giving) is intuitive for men as well as women. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 73, 164–168 (2017).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 67.

    Rand, D. G., Brescoll, V. L., Everett, J. A. C., Capraro, V. & Barcelo, H. Social heuristics and social roles: Intuition favors altruism for women but not for men. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 145, 389–396 (2016).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 68.

    Verbeke, W. J. M. I., Pozharliev, R., Van Strien, J. W., Belschak, F. & Bagozzi, R. P. “I am resting but rest less well with you”. The moderating effect of anxious attachment style on alpha power during EEG resting state in a social context. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 8, 486 (2014).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 69.

    Morishima, Y., Schunk, D., Bruhin, A., Ruff, C. C. & Fehr, E. Linking brain structure and activation in temporoparietal junction to explain the neurobiology of human altruism. Neuron 75, 73–79 (2012).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 70.

    Karamacoska, D., Barry, R. J., Steiner, G. Z., Coleman, E. P. & Wilson, E. J. Intrinsic EEG and task-related changes in EEG affect Go/NoGo task performance. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 125, 17–28 (2018).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 71.

    Hu, Y., Hu, Y., Li, X., Pan, Y. & Cheng, X. Brain-to-brain synchronization across two persons predicts mutual prosociality. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 12, 1835–1844 (2017).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 72.

    Kanske, P., Böckler, A., Trautwein, F.-M., Parianen Lesemann, F. H. & Singer, T. Are strong empathizers better mentalizers? Evidence for independence and interaction between the routes of social cognition. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 11, 1383–1392 (2016).

    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 73.

    Tusche, A., Bockler, A., Kanske, P., Trautwein, F.-M. & Singer, T. Decoding the charitable brain: Empathy, perspective taking, and attention shifts differentially predict altruistic giving. J. Neurosci. 36, 4719–4732 (2016).

    CAS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 74.

    Caprara, G. V., Alessandri, G. & Eisenberg, N. Prosociality: The contribution of traits, values, and self-efficacy beliefs. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 102, 1289–1303 (2012).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 75.

    Schlegel, F., Lehmann, D., Faber, P. L., Milz, P. & Gianotti, L. R. R. EEG microstates during resting represent personality differences. Brain Topogr. 25, 20–26 (2012).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 76.

    Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A. & Lang, A. G. Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav. Res. Methods 41, 1149–1160 (2009).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 77.

    Baumgartner, T., Langenbach, B. P., Gianotti, L. R. R., Müri, R. M. & Knoch, D. Frequency of everyday pro-environmental behaviour is explained by baseline activation in lateral prefrontal cortex. Sci. Rep. 9, 9 (2019).

    ADS 
    PubMed 
    PubMed Central 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 78.

    Tagliazucchi, E. & Laufs, H. Decoding wakefulness levels from typical fmri resting-state data reveals reliable drifts between wakefulness and sleep. Neuron 82, 695–708 (2014).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 79.

    Nuwer, M. R. et al. IFCN standards for digital recording of clinical EEG. International federation of clinical neurophysiology. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 106, 259–261 (1998).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 80.

    Barry, R. J., Clarke, A. R., Johnstone, S. J., Magee, C. A. & Rushby, J. A. EEG differences between eyes-closed and eyes-open resting conditions. Clin. Neurophysiol. 118, 2765–2773 (2007).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 81.

    van Diessen, E. et al. Opportunities and methodological challenges in EEG and MEG resting state functional brain network research. Clin. Neurophysiol. 126, 1468–1481 (2015).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 82.

    Gianotti, L. R. et al. Tonic activity level in the right prefrontal cortex predicts individuals’ risk taking. Psychol. Sci. 20, 33–38 (2009).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 83.

    Koenig, T. EEGLAB plugin for microstates. https://www.thomaskoenig.ch/index.php/software/10-eeglab-plugin-manual (2017).

  • 84.

    Delorme, A. & Makeig, S. EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. J. Neurosci. Methods 134, 9–21 (2004).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 85.

    Strik, W. K. & Lehmann, D. Data-determined window size and space-oriented segmentation of spontaneous EEG map series. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 87, 169–174 (1993).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 86.

    Tibshirani, R. & Walther, G. Cluster validation by prediction strength. J. Comput. Graph. Stat. 14, 511–528 (2005).

    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 87.

    Britz, J., Landis, T. & Michel, C. M. Right parietal brain activity precedes perceptual alternation of bistable stimuli. Cereb. Cortex 19, 55–65 (2009).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 88.

    Neumann, M. et al. Physician empathy: definition, outcome-relevance and its measurement in patient care and medical education. GMS J. Med. Educ. 29, 2 (2012).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 89.

    Davis, M. H. A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. (1980).

  • 90.

    Schwartz, S. H. A proposal for measuring value orientations across nations. Core ESS Ques. 2, 259–319 (2003).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 91.

    Friese, M., Bluemke, M. & Wänke, M. Predicting voting behavior with implicit attitude measures. The 2002 German parliamentary election. Exp. Psychol. 54, 247–255 (2007).

    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 92.

    Fehr, E. & Gachter, S. Cooperation and punishment in public goods experiments. Am. Econ. Rev. 90, 980–994 (2000).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 93.

    McClintock, C. G. & Allison, S. T. Social value orientation and helping behavior. J. Appl. Soc. 19, 353–362 (1989).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 94.

    Gärling, T., Fujii, S., Gärling, A. & Jakobsson, C. Moderating effects of social value orientation on determinants of proenvironmental behavior intention. J. Environ. Psychol. 23, 1–9 (2003).


    Google Scholar
     

  • 95.

    Chen, S., Lee-Chai, A. Y. & Bargh, J. A. Relationship orientation as a moderator of the effects of social power. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 80, 173–187 (2001).

    CAS 
    PubMed 

    Google Scholar
     

  • 96.

    Meng, X.-L., Rosenthal, R. & Rubin, D. B. Comparing correlated correlation coefficients. Psychol. Bull. 111, 172 (1992).


    Google Scholar
     



  • Source link

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *