《认知神经科学》课程教学资源（参考文献）[Adolphs, R.（2003）]Cognitive neuroscience of human social behaviour

团购合买资源类别：文库，文档格式：PDF，文档页数：14，文件大小：1.02MB

REVIEWS A new field has emerged to investigate the cognitive neuroscience of social behaviour, the popularity of which is attested by recent conferences, special issues of journals1,2 and by books3,4. But the theoretical underpinnings of this new field derive from an uneasy marriage of two different approaches to social behaviour: sociobiology and evolutionary psychology on the one hand, and social psychology on the other. The first approach treats the study of social behaviour as a topic in ethology, continuous with studies of motivated behaviour in other animals. The second approach has often emphasized the uniqueness of human behaviour, and the uniqueness of the individual person, their environment and their social surroundings. These two different emphases do not need to conflict with one another. In fact, neuroscience might offer a reconciliation between biological and psychological approaches to social behaviour in the realization that its neural regulation reflects both innate, automatic and COGNITIVELY IMPENETRABLE mechanisms, as well as acquired, contextual and volitional aspects that include SELF-REGULATION. We share the first category of features with other species, and we might be distinguished from them partly by elaborations on the second category of features. In a way, an acknowledgement of such an architecture simply provides detail to the way in which social cognition is complex — it is complex because it is not monolithic, but rather it consists of several tracks of information processing that can be variously recruited depending on the circumstances. Specifying those tracks, the conditions under which they are engaged, how they interact, and how they must ultimately be coordinated to regulate social behaviour in an adaptive fashion, is the task faced by a neuroscientific approach to social cognition. Social cognition and emotion What is social cognition? If the social is ubiquitous, we face the problem of including all aspects of cognition as social. If it is special, we have to explain why and how (BOX 1). As a matter of practice, social brain science has indeed carved out a restricted domain of cognition. The bulk of studies emphasize motivational and emotional factors. Whereas other aspects of cognition — such as language, for example — contribute substantially to the regulation of social behaviour, the intuition has been that emotion stands in a privileged position. This intuition has its basis in our observations of other species and of human infants, whose social behaviour seems to be tightly coupled to emotion — a coupling that is heavily regulated in adults. But the intuition also has a functional explanation. Emotions can be thought of as states that coordinate homeostasis in a complex, dynamic environment; in so far as one aspect of the COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE OF HUMAN SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR Ralph Adolphs We are an intensely social species — it has been argued that our social nature defines what makes us human, what makes us conscious or what gave us our large brains. As a new field, the social brain sciences are probing the neural underpinnings of social behaviour and have produced a banquet of data that are both tantalizing and deeply puzzling. We are finding new links between emotion and reason, between action and perception, and between representations of other people and ourselves. No less important are the links that are also being established across disciplines to understand social behaviour, as neuroscientists, social psychologists, anthropologists, ethologists and philosophers forge new collaborations. COGNITIVELY IMPENETRABLE Processes that are not influenced strategically by cognition. They cannot be influenced at will, and their engagement is beyond our control. SELF-REGULATION The ability to control one’s behaviour effortfully and often in opposition to emotional drive (for example, controlling an anger outburst). Most prominent in adult humans, self-regulation depends on regions in the prefrontal cortex. NATURE REVIEWS | NEUROSCIENCE VOLUME 4 | MARCH 2003 | 165 Deparment of Neurology, University of Iowa, 200 Hawkins Drive, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, USA. e-mail: ralph-adolphs@uiowa.edu doi:10.1038/nrn1056 COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE

MORAL EMOTIONS Guilt, shame, embarrassment, jealousy, pride and other states that depend on a social context. They arise later in development and evolution than the basic emotions (happiness, fear, anger, disgust, sadness) and require an extended representation of oneself as situated within a society. They function to regulate social behaviours, often in the long-term interests of a social group rather than the short-term interests of the individual person. MODULES Functional and/or anatomical components that are relatively specialized to process only certain kinds of information. Modules were originally thought of as cognitively impenetrable and informationally encapsulated (having restricted access to only certain information). Although most people do not view modules in such strict terms, there is evidence of domain-specific processing that is specialized for specific ecological categories (such as faces and social contract violations), although there is debate on this issue. EVENT-RELATED POTENTIALS (ERPs). Electrical potentials that are generated in the brain as a consequence of the synchronized activation of neuronal networks by external stimuli. These evoked potentials are recorded at the scalp and consist of precisely timed sequences of waves or ‘components’. MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY (MEG). A non-invasive technique that allows the detection of the changing magnetic fields that are associated with brain activity, similar to the detection of changing electric fields measured by ERPs. CATEGORIZATION Stimulus categories function to group together stimuli to which a similar behavioural response should be mounted. Coarse, generic categorization (for example, a dog as an animal) is superordinate; subordinate categorization includes basiclevel (a dog as a dog) and unique categories (a dog as your own pet). 166 | MARCH 2003 | VOLUME 4 www.nature.com/reviews/neuro REVIEWS Perception of social signals A large variety of stimuli are available for investigating social cognition (FIG. 2). Many recent studies on this topic have started, so to speak, at the input end — by showing pictures of social relevance to subjects (often under passive viewing conditions), and associating differences in the social content of stimuli with differences in the neural structures that are engaged in their processing. This work — primarily functional imaging studies — has found covariances between stimulus dimensions and brain structures. However, it is important to keep in mind that lesion studies are also needed to further elucidate a causal role for a given structure in a neural system (that is, to confirm that its role is essential). These lesion data are often lacking at this stage. It is also important to note that several of the structures that appear in this section will reappear later, reflecting their roles in implementing several social processes. Investigations have focused on the visual modality in primates, although a few studies have examined other sensory modalities as well (BOX 2). Social visual signals include information about the face (such as its expression and the direction of gaze), as well as about body posture and movement. Although prototypical facial expressions reliably signal the so-called basic emotions such as fear or happiness, human viewers are also surprisingly adept at making reliable judgements about social information from impoverished stimuli, such as faint changes in facial expression7 , or a few seconds of environment is social, emotions will participate in regulating social behaviour. In fact, one class of emotions — the so-called social or MORAL EMOTIONS — serve specifically in this capacity and probably guide altruistic helping5 and punishment6 . Most structures that have been shown to be important in processing emotions have therefore also turned out to be important for social behaviour. These include: first, specific regions in higher-order sensory cortices; second, the amygdala, the ventral striatum and orbitofrontal cortex; and third, additional cortical regions such as the left prefrontal, right parietal, and anterior and posterior cingulate cortices. It is possible to relate these three sets of regions to three different sets of processes. Higher-order sensory cortices are involved in the perceptual representation of stimuli and their constituent features. The amygdala, striatum and orbitofrontal cortex mediate an association of this perceptual representation with emotional response, cognitive processing and behavioural motivation. Higher cortical regions are then involved in the construction of an internal model of the social environment, involving representation of other people, their social relationships with oneself, and the value of one’s actions in the context of a social group. To some extent, these three sets of processes build on one another, although their interactions are complex (FIG. 1). For organizational purposes, the sections that follow consider these neural structures roughly in the same order as above. Box 1 | Are our brains specialized for social cognition? Brains and social behaviours vary across different mammalian species. Primitive insectivores (for example, hedgehogs) already show tightly regulated maternal behaviours that allow extended development of their offspring; non-human primates (for example, chimpanzees) live in extended societies of a few dozen subjects; and modern humans have created societies that encompass millions of interacting people. There is no question that humans are exceedingly skilled at large-scale social interaction, but it remains a puzzle how best to account for such abilities. Under one hypothesis149, the competition for social skills led to the evolution of cognitive mechanisms for outsmarting others150, and fuelled the expansion of the human brain and perhaps the elaboration of certain neural systems151. In support of this idea, there is a correlation across primate species between the size of their social group and the relative volume of neocortex149. Hedgehog Chimpanzee Human Courtesy of Laura Roberts

NATURE REVIEWS | NEUROSCIENCE VOLUME 4 | MARCH 2003 | 167 REVIEWS simulation of it15. The fusiform gyrus, the superior temporal gyrus and other less well specified regions of occipitotemporal cortex could therefore be thought of as an interconnected system of regions that construct a spatially distributed perceptual representation of different aspects of faces. There is good evidence that activation in all of these regions can be modulated by attention16 and by the context in which the visual social signal appears17,18. The above anatomical investigations are complemented by data on the timing of face processing. Studies using EVENT-RELATED POTENTIALS (ERPs) and MAGNETOENCEPHALOGRAPHY (MEG) show that some coarse CATEGORIZATION of face features, such as gender and emotion, can occur at latencies as short as 100 ms (REFS 19–22). Peak activity that is related to face-specific processing near the fusiform gyrus is seen around 170–200 ms (REF. 23). Whereas the construction of a detailed structural representation of the face therefore seems to require about 170 ms, some rapid, coarse categorization can occur with substantially shorter latencies, presumably indicating coarse perceptual routes that are parallel to a full structural encoding of the stimulus. A recent study24 investigated these different levels of categorization in detail and corroborated the idea of a fast, superordinate categorization of faces at a relatively short latency (around 100 ms). This categorization was followed by a subordinate categorization with a longer latency (around 170 ms), which was sufficient to discriminate individual identity. Similar evidence for the extraction of information at subordinate levels with increasing processing time has been provided by single-unit studies of face-selective cells in the monkey inferotemporal cortex25. At least three non-exclusive mechanisms could implement such computations: initial feed-forward processing followed by top–down modulation from higher regions, progressive processing within a region, or iterative cycles of processing between a region and others (either ‘lower’ or ‘higher’ in a processing hierarchy). A growing body of work has used visual stimuli that signal biological motion (FIG. 2) to study social cognition. Social psychologists first showed our propensity to make social inferences from visual motion of abstract shapes in the 1940s (REFS 26,27), and recent studies indicate that specific movement cues might generate attributions of ANIMACY, intentionality and AGENCY28,29. Visual motion stimuli elicit attributions of intentionality and animacy in infants, and robustly elicit intentional, emotional and personality attributions in adults, even when only static depictions of their trajectories are shown. More specific information about the movements of a human body are offered by POINT-LIGHT DISPLAYS30, which generate exceptionally robust shape-from-motion cues that allow the recognition of identity31, gender32, emotions33 and personality traits34. In line with the role of the superior temporal cortex in processing dynamic aspects of faces, this region is also activated by viewing biological motion in whole bodies35 or their point-light displays36,37, and by more abstract movements of geometric shapes38,39. full-body interpersonal interactions8 . Not only are we exceedingly sensitive to the social signals themselves, but we are also sensitive to the details of the context in which they occur. Regions of non-primary sensory cortices might be relatively specialized to process certain socially relevant stimulus attributes. The best evidence comes from the study of faces, for which higher-order visual cortices can be regarded as an assembly of MODULES that process distinct attributes, as borne out by various lesion studies, scalp and intracranial recordings, and functional imaging data. The results point to a role for the fusiform gyrus in processing the structural, static properties of faces, which are reliable indicators of personal identity. By contrast, regions more anterior and dorsal in the temporal lobe (such as the superior temporal gyrus and sulcus) are involved in processing information about the changeable configurations of faces, such as facial expressions, and eye and mouth movements9,10 (FIG. 3). Activation along the superior temporal sulcus and gyrus has been found when subjects view stimuli depicting biological motion, such as gaze shifts11,12 and mouth movements13. Processing in this region might draw on both dorsal and ventral visual streams in integrating shape and motion information14, and it might reflect a comparison of the observed action with the viewer’s ANIMACY The subjective impression that a stimulus is alive. AGENCY The subjective impression of a willful, goal-directed action. POINT-LIGHT DISPLAYS Visual motion stimuli created by attaching small lights to an actor’s body joints and filming the person moving in an otherwise dark room. Although they seem random when static, the biological motion of the lights immediately generates the compelling perception of a person moving about the room. Detailed perceptual processing • Fusiform gyrus • Superior temporal gyrus Emotional response in body • Visceral, autonomic, endocrine changes Social reasoning • Prefrontal cortex Coarse perceptual processing • Superior colliculus Selfregulation Reappraisal Modulation of cognition (memory, attention) • Cingulate cortex • Hippocampus • Basal forebrain Representation of emotional response • Somatosensory-related cortices Representation of perceived action • Left frontal operculum • Superior temporal gyrus Motivational evaluation • Amygdala • Orbitofrontal cortex • Ventral striatum Figure 1 | Processes and brain structures that are involved in social cognition. It is possible to assign sets of neural structures to various stages of information processing, as I argue in this review. However, the flow of social information defies any simple scheme for at least two reasons: it is multidirectional and it is recursive. A single process is implemented by a flexible set of structures, and a single structure participates in several processes, often during distinct windows of time. Processing routes differ in terms of their automaticity, cognitive penetrability, detail of the representations they involve and processing speed. The structures outlined in this figure share some core features of a social information processing system: selectivity (they make distinctions between different kinds of information), categorization and generalization, and the incorporation of past experience. Several of the components of social cognition (inside the grey shaded region) contribute to social knowledge. Reappraisal and self-regulation are particular modes of feedback modulation whereby evaluation and emotional response to social stimuli can be volitionally influenced

168 | MARCH 2003 | VOLUME 4 www.nature.com/reviews/neuro REVIEWS These activations probably reflect the role of the superior temporal cortex in processing information about biological motion, on the basis of which we make social attributions. From perception to judgement Several brain regions are activated not only as a function of properties that are inherent to the stimuli, but also as a function of the psychological judgements that we make about them. In a sense, the influence of such judgements reflects a progressive decoupling from responses that are dictated by the stimulus itself to information that is generated by the brain through associations and inferences. The amygdala is one structure that is anatomically positioned to participate in such postperceptual processing, as it receives highly processed visual information from the anterior temporal cortices, and stores codes for subsequent processing of such perceptual information in other brain regions. In this way, it can influence memory, attention, decision making and other cognitive functions on the basis of the social significance of the stimuli that are being processed. a b d c e Figure 2 | Visual stimuli for investigating social cognition. These range from a | point-light walkers and b | dynamic geometric figures, to c | actual human social interactions. Facial expressions have been one of the most commonly used stimuli. d | They can be morphed from, say, fear to sadness and e | their eye region can signal specific social information, such as guilt, fear or flirtatiousness. Stimuli are from sets developed by: F. Heider (b), P. Ekman (d) and S. Baron-Cohen (e). Box 2 | Other sensory modalities used to study social cognition Most studies on social cognition have used visual stimuli, but it is clear that real-life social interactions draw on additional modalities. Whereas touch is an important social communication channel in other mammals, in modern humans it is relatively restricted to those with whom we have the most intimate relationships. A recently described distinct neural pathway of slow-conducting, C-afferent fibres that convey information about pleasant, light touch to the insula could underlie processing of social somatosensory signals, such as a caress152. The sense of smell provides powerful social signals in other mammals but, again, it seems to be less important in humans. Laboratory studies have found influences of odorants on human physiology, but the effects of odours on social behaviour are less clear. Whereas the orbitofrontal cortex and the amygdala are activated by the emotional quality of odours in humans153,154, and pheromones differentially activate the human hypothalamus155, the links of these findings to actual social behaviour remain unclear. Audition provides important social signals in addition to language. The intonation of speech — prosody — can signal various emotions, and is recognized using some of the same structures that we use for recognizing facial expressions156. Music is an especially intriguing stimulus, as it might serve a social function that is not found in other animals, and it has been shown to elicit intense emotional responses that activate the orbitofrontal cortex, the insula and the amygdala157

NATURE REVIEWS | NEUROSCIENCE VOLUME 4 | MARCH 2003 | 169 REVIEWS Judging race, trustworthiness and attractiveness Beyond its role in recognition of basic emotions, the amygdala is involved in more complex social judgements. For example, it shows differential habituation of activation to faces of people of another race54, and its activation has been found to correlate with race stereotypes of which the viewer might be unaware55. However, the role of the amygdala in processing information about race is still unclear. Other brain regions in the extrastriate visual cortex are also differentially activated as a function of race56, and lesions of the amygdala do not seem to impair race judgements57. Other kinds of social judgement also seem to involve the amygdala. In one study, patients with bilateral amygdala damage were found to be impaired in judging how much to trust another person from viewing their face. They all judged other people to look more trustworthy and more approachable than did normal viewers58, a pattern of impairment that is also consistent with the often indiscriminately friendly behaviour of such patients in real life (FIG. 4a). The role of the amygdala in processing stimuli related to potential threat or danger therefore extends to the complex judgements on the basis of which we approach or trust other people. These lesion studies have been complemented by functional imaging studies on the role of the amygdala in judging trustworthiness (FIG. 4b). When normal subjects view faces of people that look untrustworthy, activation is found in the superior temporal sulcus, the amygdala, the orbitofrontal cortex and the insular cortex59, perhaps outlining a sequence of processes that encompass perception, judgement and aspects of emotional response. Interestingly, some activation of the amygdala by untrustworthy-looking faces is independent of factors such as gender, gaze, race or emotional expression of the face59. Given that much of the variance in the physical dimensions of different faces can be eliminated yet still produce amygdala activation, it is possible to assume that this activation reflects the judgements and inferences that subjects make about the face, rather than its perceptual properties. An important future direction will be to examine the variance in viewers’ personality traits in these social judgements, as has been done in two recent studies correlating amygdala activation to emotional expressions with viewers’ extraversion60 or anxious temperament due to a POLYMORPHISM in the serotonin transporter promoter61. To the extent that the amygdala activation covaries with differences in the personality of the viewer, rather than the physical composition of the stimulus, we can conclude that we are tapping processes more distal to perception and closer to judgement, decision making, and the interpersonal behaviours that are based on them. Another class of social judgement that we make from faces is attractiveness, which can be manipulated by specific properties of faces. For instance, faces are perceived to look more attractive the more average or symmetrical they are, or with greater exaggeration of robusticity and NEOTENY features, all of which have been proposed to signal differential fitness. Moreover, such preferences by women can vary across different phases The bulk of research on the human amygdala has used emotional facial expressions as stimuli and has pointed most consistently to this region being involved in the processing of fear and related emotions40–42, although recent evidence indicates that its role is probably much broader43,44. Functional imaging studies show processing at several stages: a rapid, automatic evaluation and tagging of stimuli for further processing16, feedback modulation of attentional processing in visual cortices45, and modes of processing that are subject to self-regulation and volitional guidance46,47. The first and last of these stages show complementary roles for the amygdala, probably operating at complementary timescales. On the one hand, some amygdala activation is seen early48, regardless of the conscious perception of the stimulus (for example, in response to subliminal stimuli49,50 or in patients with BLINDSIGHT51 or hemispatial NEGLECT52), and regardless of attention allocation in some tasks16. On the other hand, effortful self-regulation of the emotions induced by stimuli47, REAPPRAISAL of their emotional importance46 and difficult attentional tasks53, all modulate amygdala activation. These findings urge caution in the rigid assignment of cognitive processes to neural structures, because it is probable that a given structure participates in several processes, depending on the time at which its activity is sampled and on the details of the task and context. It is conceivable that the amygdala participates both in the initial, rapid evaluation of the emotional significance of stimuli, and in a later assessment within a given context and goal. BLINDSIGHT The ability of a person with a lesion in the primary visual cortex to reach towards or guess at the orientation of objects projected on the part of the visual field that corresponds to this lesion, even though they report that they can see nothing in that part of their visual field. NEGLECT A neurological syndrome (often involving damage to the right parietal cortex) in which patients show a marked difficulty in detecting or responding to information in the contralesional field. REAPPRAISAL Reinterpretation of a situation to assign it a different value. Whereas reappraisal changes emotional response by changing one’s perception of the stimulus, other strategies of self-regulation directly modulate emotional response despite one’s original perception. POLYMORPHISM The simultaneous existence in the same population of two or more genotypes in frequencies that cannot be explained by recurrent mutations. Lateral fusiform gyrus Inferior occipital gyrus Superior temporal sulcus Figure 3 | Activation in visual cortices to viewing faces. Changeable, dynamic aspects of faces, such as expression and gaze, activate the superior temporal sulcus, whereas static aspects activate the fusiform gyrus. The top panel shows these activations on a human brain smoothed to reveal both sulci (darker grey) and gyri. The bottom panel shows a flattened representation of the same data. Data were generated by contrasting the activations to viewing faces with those to viewing houses (orange, greater activation to faces; blue, greater activation to houses). Modified, with permission, from REF. 10 © (2000) Elsevier Science

170 | MARCH 2003 | VOLUME 4 www.nature.com/reviews/neuro REVIEWS and the orbitofrontal cortex66. These structures probably have a broad role in processing the motivational properties of stimuli. For example, they are also activated when males find pictures of sports cars more rewarding than pictures of limousines or small cars67.The ventral striatum and the orbitofrontal cortex are reciprocally connected with the amygdala; all three structures can be thought of as components of a neural system that links sensory representations of stimuli with the social judgements we make about them on the basis of their motivational value. Given that the same of the menstrual cycle62, as do other aspects of their categorization of men63, possibly providing a link between mate preference and probability of conception. Judgements of attractiveness can reflect both aesthetic judgements (for example, males can judge faces of both males and females to look beautiful), as well as motivational aspects (for example, heterosexual males prefer to look at beautiful female faces rather than at beautiful male faces). These two aspects have been dissociated in functional imaging studies64. The motivational aspects of facial attractiveness activate the ventral striatum64,65 NEOTENY The retention of juvenile characteristics in the adults of a species. 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 Signal change in left amygdala (%) Low Med High Low Med Implicit Explicit High 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 Signal change in right amygdala (%) Low Med High Low Med Implicit Explicit High R 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 a b Normal Bilat. Right Left Control Normal Bilat. Right Left Control –2 –1 0 1 2 Mean trustworthiness rating JM SM RH 6 4 2 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 –2 Difference from normal mean (in s.d.) 6 SM 4 2 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 –2 Difference from normal mean (in s.d.) JM 6 4 2 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 –2 Difference from normal mean (in s.d.) RH 3 2 0 1 –1 –2 0 20 40 60 80 100 –3 Mean rating given by normal subjects Face stimulus (rank-ordered by mean normal rating) Face stimulus (rank-ordered by mean normal rating) Face stimulus (rank-ordered by mean normal rating) Face stimulus (rank-ordered by mean normal rating) z-values Figure 4 | Investigating social judgement with two different methods. Investigations of the neural basis of judging trustworthiness have yielded convergent results from functional imaging studies in normal people, and from lesion studies in neurological patients. a | Evidence from lesion studies. Bilateral damage to the amygdala selectively impairs the ability to judge untrustworthiness of faces. These data, from three patients (JM, SM and RH), show that the amygdala is not only involved when we normally make social judgements, but that amygdala dysfunction precludes normal social judgement. This does not mean that the amygdala is sufficient for judging trustworthiness, but that it is necessary. Bilat., bilateral amygdala damage (n = 3); Control, braindamaged controls with no damage to the amygdala (n = 10, standard error shown); Left, unilateral left amygdala damage (n = 3); Normal, neurologically normal controls ( n = 46), standard deviation shown; Right, unilateral right amygdala damage (n = 4). The lower panels show individual scores from the three patients and the mean rating given by normal subjects. Modified, with permission, from Nature REF. 58 © (1998) Macmillan Magazines Ltd. b | Evidence from functional imaging. The top image shows the activation in the amygdala observed when viewing untrustworthy faces is contrasted with viewing trustworthy faces. The z-values (colour scale) observed in the amygdala correspond to p < 0.025. The bar graphs below show the activation in the left and right amygdala for those faces that received the lowest (Low), medium (Med) or highest (High) ratings of trustworthiness. These activations were measured under two task conditions: an implicit task in which viewers were asked to judge the gender of the face, and an explicit task in which viewers were asked to judge the trustworthiness of the face. R, right hemisphere. Reproduced, with permission, from Nature Neuroscience REF. 59 © (2002) Macmillan Magazines Ltd

NATURE REVIEWS | NEUROSCIENCE VOLUME 4 | MARCH 2003 | 171 REVIEWS Theory of mind. Abilities that have been dubbed ‘theory of mind’68 allow us to attribute mental states to other people69. Attributions of beliefs, specifically false beliefs, to other subjects have been particularly studied (FIG. 5a). Such abilities, which emerge at about four years of age, might be unique to humans, and might be assembled out of a collection of more basic skills by which we assign animacy, actions, goals and intentions to stimuli, an issue that has seen intense recent investigation using visual motion stimuli70. In addition to the reliable activation of superior temporal gyrus that I mentioned earlier, several functional imaging studies have shown activation of the medial frontal lobe and inferior parietal lobule when people view visual motion38,71,72 or gaze stimuli73 that signal such directed mental states. structures that mediate social judgements also mediate basic reward processing, we are led to question whether the former might be reducible to the latter, an issue that I take up in the concluding section of this review. Thinking about other people Several of the processes discussed in the preceding section involve more than perception; they bring in additional information beyond what is conveyed by the stimulus to guide our social decisions and judgements about it. Primates, and especially humans, stand out in their ability to take into account what others are thinking — an ability that requires representing what might be going on in other people’s minds. A varied collection of processes comprise such higher-level manipulation of social information. b c a Sagittal Transverse Coronal 0 1 2 3 4 5 z-values Figure 5 | Investigating theory of mind. a | Sally-Ann task. Schematic of the scenario that is shown to infants and children to assess theory-of-mind abilities, specifically the capacity to attribute false beliefs. Sally has a pram and Ann has a box. Sally puts a toy into her pram, and then she goes out for a walk. While she is outside, Ann takes the toy from the pram and puts it into her own box. When Sally comes back, where will she look for the toy? Normal children of four years of age and older answer that Sally will look inside her pram, because that is where she (falsely) believes the toy is. b | Theory-of-mind from cartoons. Assessing theory of mind in adults without ceiling effects is more difficult and various tasks have been used. This figure shows examples of cartoon stimuli in which understanding the joke depends on the ability to attribute mental states to others (left) or does not (right). Contrasting these two kinds of cartoons results in brain activation that reflects engagement of theory-of-mind processes, specifically an activation in medial prefrontal cortex (c). Panel c reproduced, with permission from REF. 71 © (2000) Elsevier Science

172 | MARCH 2003 | VOLUME 4 www.nature.com/reviews/neuro REVIEWS relationships, social cooperativity, moral behaviour, and social aggression93–96. In this case, its role has been stressed particularly in the context of social development and its pathologies (see the section on neuropsychiatry below). It could be that the integration of information about other people and oneself 97, and the social relationship between the two, are the hallmarks of medial prefrontal processing. Many of the same stimuli that engage the superior temporal gyrus, and lead viewers to attribute actions, intentions and goals, also activate regions of the neocortex that are involved in representing actions70. These regions include premotor- and somatosensory-related cortices — the efferent and afferent sides of actions, respectively. A series of recent studies have investigated the role of the right somatosensory-related cortices and the left premotor cortex in making emotional and personality attributions from point-light displays and movements of geometric shapes. Damage in both regions impairs the ability to make such attributions98. Simulation. There is a rapidly growing literature supporting the idea that we understand other people’s behaviour, in part, by simulation99. Observing another person’s actions results in desynchronization of motor cortex activity measured with MEG100. Imitating another subject’s actions through observation activates the premotor cortex in functional imaging studies101; such activation is somatotopic with respect to the body part that is observed to perform the action, even in the absence of any overt action on the part of the observing subject102. In fact, in both humans103 and monkeys104, so-called ‘mirror neurons’ have been discovered. These neurons respond both when the subject is doing something specific, and when he or she observes another person doing the same thing. Damage restricted to somatosensory cortex impairs the ability to recognize complex blends of emotions in facial expressions105 (FIG. 6), and there is an association between the impaired somatic sensation of one’s own body and the impaired ability to judge other people’s emotions105. Functional imaging studies also support a role for right somatosensory-related cortices in representing the actions that we observe other people performing, as being distinct from those that we perform ourselves106. So, there is good evidence that we can figure out how others are feeling, what they intend and how they are likely to act, in part by putting ourselves in their shoes, so to speak. This process could be entirely automatic and covert, but it seems likely that there are considerable differences in how skilled different people are at employing it. These differences would be expected to correlate with differences in empathy, emotional awareness or their dysfunction (as seen in sociopathy and ALEXITHYMIA, for example). There are also some unanswered questions about the extent of simulation that is necessary to construct social knowledge. For example, does the recognition of emotions from facial expressions rely on the internal generation of a motor or somatosensory representation of the face alone? Or does it rely on the generation of a more comprehensive Although there is convergent evidence that theoryof-mind abilities emerge in a coordinated fashion during development, so far there is only preliminary evidence to indicate that they are a neuroanatomical package. The evidence for a role for the amygdala in theory-of-mind abilities comes from a small number of patients with amygdala lesions74,75. A single functional imaging study has argued for amygdala activation in a theory-of-mind task requiring judgements about facial expressions76, and another study has found impairments after amygdala damage using the same stimuli77. The evidence is stronger for the medial prefrontal cortex, as several functional imaging studies have found that it is activated when subjects perform theory-of-mind tasks71,78,79 (FIG. 5c). In addition, a few studies have found that patients with damage to the frontal lobes are impaired on theory-of-mind tasks69,80. Furthermore, there is some evidence that the role of the medial prefrontal cortex in theory-of-mind tasks can be dissociated from its broader role in behavioural control and executive function that is also engaged by most of the tasks that are commonly used81,82. Rather than attempting to assign the whole set of theory-of-mind abilities to a particular neural structure or system, it might be more promising to explore the dependency of specific components of this ability on specific neural structures. In one study, it was found that damage to orbitofrontal cortex impaired the ability to detect a faux pas 83, perhaps indicating that this brain region contributes to our understanding of other people in part by engaging the emotions and feelings that accompany social interaction. In support of this idea, it was found that appreciation of humour84, social-norm transgression resulting in embarrassment85, viewing of erotic stimuli86 and elicitation of other moral emotions87, all activate the medial prefrontal cortex. The role for the medial orbital and anterior cingulate regions in monitoring and regulating social emotions is consistent with their activation during interactions between attention, awareness and emotion88–90. The data can be interpreted along two different directions: the specialization of prefrontal cortices for aspects of social cognition, or the reliance of social cognition on more general resources that are provided by this region of the brain. In line with the second interpretation, sectors of prefrontal cortex seem to be crucial for integrating the allocation of cognitive resources on the basis of automatic emotional evaluation and volitional, effortful direction90,91. These mechanisms might therefore reflect aspects of a more general function in regulating the fit between goals and behaviour. There could then be specific examples of such domain-general processing on which social behaviour draws: contextual inhibition by prefrontal cortex of emotional responses triggered by the amygdala92, or response inhibition and reversal in the face of a changing social context82. In line with the alternative interpretation that sectors of the prefrontal cortex are specialized for processing social information, medial and orbital prefrontal cortices have been linked to the regulation of interpersonal ALEXITHYMIA Cognitive disturbance that is characterized by the difficulty in describing one’s own emotions. WASON SELECTION TASK The most popular experimental design for probing deductive reasoning. It consists of a conditional statement, the truth of which the subject must decide. Typically, conditionals about social rules, threats and promises all show a facilitation in the proportion of logically correct choices, and it has been argued that humans evolved a specialized skill to detect deception in the context of social contracts (for example, cheating). SOMATIC MARKERS Emotional states that are triggered during the consideration of potential future outcomes of choices

NATURE REVIEWS | NEUROSCIENCE VOLUME 4 | MARCH 2003 | 173 REVIEWS Social reasoning, decision making and dilemmas The orbitofrontal cortex has also been implicated in social reasoning. Damage to this region impairs the ability to figure out that other people are being deceptive80, and results in an impaired performance in reasoning about social exchange using the WASON SELECTION TASK107,108. These findings could reflect the previously mentioned role for the orbitofrontal cortex in guiding social cognition by the elicitation of emotional states that serve to bias cognition, a role that is further supported by investigations of decision making and moral reasoning. It has long been known that damage to the ventromedial prefrontal cortices impairs the ability to decide advantageously in real life109, an ability that relies on SOMATIC MARKERS95. Investigations using a gambling task have shown that somatic markers appear in anticipation of making a risky choice, even prior to its execution110, and that they can appear in the absence of overt knowledge about the risks of the choice (or about the somatic marker, for that matter)111. There is further evidence that the reward and punishment that come into play during such gambling tasks activate the medial prefrontal cortex112, and might engage distinct sectors of the orbitofrontal cortex113. The amygdala might also be activated during decision making, specifically when waiting for a potentially negative outcome after a risky decision has been made114. Whereas damage to the orbitofrontal cortex in adults impairs somatic markers for decision making, it spares abstract knowledge regarding decision making; such patients can usually describe what to do in an abstract choice, but become impaired when faced with actually having to choose themselves115. By contrast, damage to the orbitofrontal cortex incurred early in childhood impairs not only actual decision making, but also abstract knowledge regarding advantageous choices and specifically about right and wrong — that is, moral knowledge116. The role of specific brain structures in moral behaviour has been investigated using social and moral dilemmas (BOX 3) in which the choice options are structured so that they conflict96. Such conflict could arise from short-term versus long-term goals, or from goals that are advantageous to oneself versus those that are advantageous for others or for society as a whole. It is therefore closely related to altruistic behaviour, to social cooperativity and to the cognitive processes that guide behaviour in fields as diverse as politics and economics. A subset of moral dilemmas involve one’s own agency and trigger strong emotions in their consideration; these have been found to engage structures that are involved in emotion processing, such as the superior temporal sulcus, and the cingulate and medial prefrontal cortices117. Social cooperation in the Prisoner’s dilemma (BOX 3) engages a similar set of structures, including the orbitofrontal and anterior cingulate cortices and the ventral striatum118. All of the above data on the medial and orbital prefrontal cortex are consistent with a role for this region in guiding the strategic adoption of someone else’s point of view — perhaps by triggering emotional states, by engaging simulation routines or by more cognitive strategies. representation that simulates the entire state of the body that is associated with the emotion shown by the face? Perhaps the depth of detail to which the body state associated with an action, emotion or social process needs to be simulated depends on the demands of the task at hand, ranging from partial and coarse representations in association cortices to finegrained topographic representations in the primary somatosensory cortex. 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Impaired subjects Not impaired Number of subjects a b Lesion results in normal performance Lesion results in impaired performance Figure 6 | Brain regions that might support simulation. This figure shows the association between lesions in particular regions and the impaired ability to judge other people’s emotional state. a | Performance scores of 108 subjects with focal cerebral lesions. The subjects were divided into two groups according to their performance score: impaired and normal. b | To investigate the possibility that some lesions were systematically associated with either a high or a low performance, the overlaps of lesions from subjects within each of these two groups was computed. Different colours encode the difference in the density of lesions between subjects with the lowest and the highest scores. So, red regions correspond to locations at which lesions resulted in impairment more often than not, and blue regions correspond to locations at which lesions resulted in normal performance more often than not. Lesions in the right somatosensory cortex, the right insula, the anterior supramarginal gyrus and the left frontal operculum were systematically associated with impaired recognition of emotion from facial expressions. White dashed line indicates the plane of the section shown on the left. Modified, with permission from REF. 105 © (2000) Elsevier Science

174 | MARCH 2003 | VOLUME 4 www.nature.com/reviews/neuro REVIEWS reflecting redundancy within the systems in which it participates120. It is striking that patients with lesions in brain regions that are normally activated during certain processing often have impairments that are very subtle, and that only emerge under the constraints of a specific task. This probably reflects the considerable redundancy and plasticity of the brain. It also indicates that caution should be taken in attempts to predict people’s behaviour from knowledge about their brains. Neuropsychiatric aspects of social cognition The marked differences in social cognitive abilities in the normal population are continuous with those seen in neuropsychiatric disorders. Many of these disorders are developmental in nature and emphasize the important role that social environment121,122 and neural systems123 have in early socioemotional development. The neural basis of abnormal social cognition has been investigated in disorders such as autism, WILLIAMS SYNDROME, psychopathy and social phobia. Interest in the social cognitive abilities of subjects with autism was fuelled by the argument that autism features a disproportionate impairment in a specific aspect of social cognition — the ability to attribute mental states to others (that is, to have a theory of mind)124–126. This impairment might explain why some people with autism have difficulty in their social behaviour, even though they can function with high efficacy in other respects. Something like the inverse pattern of impairment is seen in Williams syndrome127, a genetic disease that features hypersociability (FIG. 7). Our knowledge about the neural underpinnings of these disorders is limited, although the amygdala has been implicated in both of them. Given that autism and Williams syndrome are developmental disorders, it is intriguing to note that the amygdala and adjacent structures show an increase in volume that seems to persist into adulthood128,129, although the functional significance of this observation is unknown. Intense interest and debate has also focused on the cognitive neuroscience of human violence and aggression130, the emergence of which depends on complex interactions between genetic predispositions and the environment131. The orbitofrontal cortex116,132 and the amygdala82 have been implicated in violent behaviour, especially if their activity is compromised early in life. For example, criminal psychopaths show structural abnormalities (reduced grey-to-white matter ratio) in the prefrontal cortex132, and abnormal activation of the orbitofrontal cortex and the amygdala in functional imaging studies133, together with reduced autonomic emotional responsivity. As we might predict from these data, psychopaths also show impaired performance on gambling tasks that have been used to assess the role of somatic markers in decision making134. The predominant interpretation of these findings has been that they reflect the broader role of these structures in emotional regulation, a role that translates into aspects of violent and aggressive behaviour when situated within a specific context93. How does the brain process social information? The roughly serial processing architecture around which this review is organized (FIG. 1) belies the complexity of social information processing. This complexity arises in at least three ways. First, there are parallel processing routes. For instance, pathways involving the amygdala and subcortical structures can trigger rapid emotional responses, whereas slower emotional behaviour relies on prefrontal and parietal cortical processing that involves self-regulatory components. Second, there is extensive feedback between different processing levels, such that it becomes difficult to assign levels to any particular hierarchy. Third, stimuli are processed in the context of a background, baseline mode of brain operation that might already introduce substantial biases. For example, semantic judgements about people from words that describe them, compared to judgements about other objects, activates many of the regions mentioned earlier, such as the medial prefrontal, superior temporal and fusiform cortices119. However, these activations arise from a high baseline activation in those regions at rest, compared to their deactivation when processing nonpeople stimuli. This indicates that the brain’s baseline activity might reflect a mode of operation that is already tuned to interpreting and categorizing the world as social119. Although the data that I have reviewed earlier in this article converge on several key brain structures that mediate social cognition, it cannot be overemphasized that the causal role of these structures remains unclear. The most commonly used technique — functional brain imaging — is statistically complicated and limited by degeneracy in the function of brain structures: a structure might be activated but not result in impairment when lesioned, perhaps WILLIAMS SYNDROME A genetic condition caused by a deletion on chromosome 7 that is characterized by an unusually social personality, limited spatial skills and motor control, and mental retardation. Patients with the disease also have heart problems, hypercalcaemia, kidney abnormalities, sensitive hearing and musculoskeletal problems. Box 3 | Moral dilemmas Moral dilemmas are choices for which all outcomes are morally undesirable. In the ‘trolley dilemma’, for example, a trolley is heading down bifurcating tracks. One set of the tracks goes towards a group of people, the other towards a single person. The default path of the runaway trolley is towards the group of people. If you do nothing, they will all be crushed to death. But you have the option of switching the tracks so that the trolley instead kills only the single person. In a variant of this dilemma, there is only a single track leading to the group of people, and you have the option of pushing a single person in front of the trolley to stop it. The options are similar in the two versions, but most people choose the action leading to the single death only in the former one, a decision influenced by emotions and sense of responsibility96. In the ‘prisoner’s dilemma’ — a formal two-person game that is used to investigate social cooperativity — players can choose to give or keep money, which determines how much they are paid in turn. If only you keep the money and the other player gives it away, you make the most money and the other player loses the most. If both of you give it away, you both make a moderate amount of money. If both of you keep money, you both lose a moderate amount of money. So, there is a conflict between the selfish strategy of keeping money (you could win a lot of money, or both of you could lose money) and the cooperative strategy of giving it away (you could lose a lot of money, or both of you could win money). If playing multiple rounds, various kinds of patterns in social behaviour can emerge, including reciprocity and mutual cooperation. Cooperation in a single-round game might depend on the prior evolution of social emotions5

点击进入文档下载页（PDF格式）

共14页，试读已结束，阅读完整版请下载

点击下载（PDF格式）

浏览记录