% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Constantino:903650,
      author       = {Constantino, Francisco Cervantes and Nicolaisen, Eliana and
                      Garat, Santiago and Paz, Valentina and Martínez-Montes,
                      Eduardo and Kessel, Dominique and Cabana, Álvaro and
                      Gradin, Victoria},
      title        = {{N}eural processing of iterated prisoner’s dilemma
                      outcomes indicates next-round choice and speed to
                      reciprocate cooperation},
      journal      = {Social neuroscience},
      volume       = {16},
      issn         = {1747-0919},
      address      = {New York [u.a.]},
      publisher    = {Psychology Press},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2021-05299},
      pages        = {103-120},
      year         = {2021},
      abstract     = {The iterated prisoner's dilemma (iPD) game is a well
                      established model for testing how people cooperate, yet the
                      neural processes that unfold after its distinct outcomes
                      have been only partly described. Recent theoretical models
                      emphasize the ubiquity of intuitive cooperation, raising
                      questions on both neural and behavioral timelines involved.
                      We studied the outcome/feedback stage of iPD rounds with
                      electroencephalography (EEG) methods. Results showed that
                      neural signals associated to this stage also relate to
                      future choice in an outcome-dependent manner: (i) after
                      zero-gain ‘sucker’s payoffs’ (unreciprocated
                      cooperation), a participant’s decision thereafter relates
                      to changes to the feedback-related negativity (FRN); (ii)
                      after one-sided non-cooperation (participant wins at
                      co-player’s expense), by the P3; (iii) after mutual
                      cooperation, by late frontal delta-band modulations.
                      Critically, faster choices to reciprocate co-player
                      cooperation were predicted, on a single-trial basis, by P3
                      and frontal delta modulations at the immediately preceding
                      trial. Delta band signaling is considered in relation to
                      homeostatic regulation processing in the literature. The
                      findings relate the early outcome/feedback stage to
                      subsequent decisional processes in the iPD, providing a
                      first neural account of the brief timelines implied in
                      heuristic modes of cooperation.},
      cin          = {INM-7},
      ddc          = {610},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)INM-7-20090406},
      pnm          = {5251 - Multilevel Brain Organization and Variability
                      (POF4-525) / 5253 - Neuroimaging (POF4-525)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5251 / G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5253},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      pubmed       = {pmid:33297873},
      UT           = {WOS:000601394000001},
      doi          = {10.1080/17470919.2020.1859410},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/903650},
}