Objective Risk in Trust Decisions Under Varying Social Distance: An Exploratory fMRI Study.

Overview

1. Department of Psychology, Tianjin University of Technology and Education, Tianjin 300222, China
2. Faculty of Psychology, Tianjin Normal University, Tianjin 300387, China

Abstract

Trust decisions involve both social evaluation and uncertainty processing, yet standard trust game paradigms do not fully dissociate trust-specific social computation from more general risk- and value-related processes. In this exploratory whole-brain fMRI study, we examined how objective risk and social distance were associated with trust decisions within a 2 × 2 trust game. Twenty-three adults completed the task, and 20 were included in the fMRI analyses after exclusion for excessive head motion. Behaviorally, trust rates were significantly lower under high than low objective risk, whereas neither the main effect of social distance nor the interaction between objective risk and social distance was significant. Relative to baseline, task performance engaged prefrontal and parietal regions. Compared with distrust decisions, trust decisions were associated with greater activation in prefrontal and visual regions, along with stronger negative activation in the insula. Objective risk was associated with differential activation in temporal, supramarginal, and precentral regions. Under the present manipulation, we did not observe significant neural modulations by social distance. These findings suggest that, in this low-context paradigm, objective risk was a more robust source of behavioral and neural variation than social distance. Given the exploratory design, modest sample size, and the task’s limited ability to separate social trust from generic risk/value processing, the findings should be interpreted cautiously.

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.

Code

The paper links to its data, not to its authors' code: see the Data section.

Tracing map

A tracing map links a paper to the code its authors published: this paper has none, so it has no map.

Data

Datasets cited

• osf:9n28m, at OSF; found in “Data Availability Statement”

Data Availability Statement

Data and procedures necessary to reproduce the experiment and analyses are available online at https://osf.io/9n28m/ (accessed on 17 February 2025).

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.

Versions

The history of this record: each version stored by the harvester or made by a correction of its authors or of the maintainers of its code, and what changed in its facts. The texts of the paper (its abstract, its availability statements) are not part of it; versions that changed only those are not listed.

Version 1, 28 September 2026: the first record

Recorded: type, language, journal, volume, issue, pages, dates, 3 authors, 6 keywords, 1 funder, 25 references, 1 RRID.

Cite

This paper

Chen, Y., Zhao, C., & Wu, X. (2026). Objective Risk in Trust Decisions Under Varying Social Distance: An Exploratory fMRI Study. Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 16(5), 695. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs16050695

Similar papers

The papers with a page that share the most with this one: the tools found in their code, their categories, datasets, cited references and authors, the rarest counting most.

[1] doi:10.1016/j.isci.2026.116747 [code]

Age and loneliness relate to reduced trust learning and alterations in amygdala function.

Journal: iScience

In common: fMRI, cognitive, 1 reference

[2] doi:10.3389/fnhum.2026.1813515 [code]

Neural correlates of risky monetary decision-making impacting others.

Journal: Frontiers in human neuroscience

In common: fMRI, cognitive, 1 reference

[3] doi:10.3758/s13415-026-01425-1 [code]

Mindful minds: How group identity shapes brain and behavior in social decision-making.

Journal: Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience

In common: fMRI, cognitive, 1 reference

[4] doi:10.1162/netn.a.544 [code]

Brain network reconfiguration during reward prediction error processing.

Journal: Network neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)

In common: fMRI, cognitive, 1 reference

[5] doi:10.1002/brb3.71376 [code]

Neurofunctional Correlates of Emotional Dysregulation: Systematic Review and ALE Meta-Analysis.

Journal: Brain and behavior

In common: fMRI, cognitive, 1 reference

[6] doi:10.1162/imag.a.1360 [code]

A dual-fMRI investigation of interpersonal emotion regulation: Predicting strategy selection and implementation success from effective brain connectivity.

Journal: Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)

In common: fMRI, cognitive, 1 reference

[7] doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2026.1773300

The good, the bad, and the in-between: an exploratory study of how different groups may be represented in the brain.

Journal: Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience

In common: fMRI, cognitive, 1 reference

[8] doi:10.3389/fncir.2026.1741762 [code]

Task-dependent increases and decreases of BOLD signal in theory of mind brain regions during strategic social interaction.

Journal: Frontiers in neural circuits

In common: fMRI, cognitive, 1 reference

[9] doi:10.1073/pnas.2530123123

Individual differences in speech monitoring: Functional and structural correlates of delayed auditory feedback.

Journal: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

In common: fMRI, cognitive, 1 reference

[10] doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2026.101770

Neural representations of the value of helping the family during adolescence.

Journal: Developmental cognitive neuroscience

In common: fMRI, 1 reference

Contribute

The authors of this paper can claim it, correct its record and validate its tracing map, and the maintainers of its code (its owner, or a public member of its organization) correct what it says of their repository; anyone signed in can ask for its removal. Every request goes to OSCR's own machine, which answers it; your account page follows them.

Request its removal

To ask OSCR to remove this record, the copies of its authors' scripts or its tracing map, use the removal request page: signed in, you say who you are, what to remove and why, then review and confirm the request. Published rules decide every request (how).

Discussion: questions and error reports about this paper and its code, from signed-in readers and its authors. It opens with sign-in.

Reproductions: reports from readers who ran the authors' code: what they reproduced, with which environment, commit and data. It opens with sign-in.

Activity: what happens around this paper: new versions of its record, its map's validation, discussions and reproductions. It opens with sign-in.