12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Investigation of autistic traits through strategic decision-making in games with adaptive agents

      research-article
      1 , 1 , 1 , 2 ,
      Scientific Reports
      Nature Publishing Group UK

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Autism Spectrum Disorders are characterized by difficulties in communicating and cooperating with other people. Impairment in Theory of Mind (ToM), the ability to infer what another person is thinking, may contribute to these social deficits. The present study assesses the relationship between autistic traits and decision-making in a socioeconomic game environment that measures ToM and cooperation. We quantified participant strategy during game play with computer agents that simulated aspects of ToM or fixed strategy agents with static behaviors or heuristics. Individuals with higher Autism Quotient (AQ) scores cooperated less than subjects with low AQ scores with the ToM agents. In contrast, subjects with higher AQ scores cooperated more with fixed strategy agents. Additionally, subjects with higher AQ scores spent more time than low AQ subjects signaling cooperative intent in games with fixed strategy agents while spending less time signaling cooperation with adaptive agents, indicating a preference toward systemizing behaviors in the face of uncertainty. We conclude that individuals with high levels of autistic traits are less likely to utilize ToM as a cognitive strategy, even when it is beneficial, to achieve a desired outcome.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The neuroscience of social decision-making.

          Given that we live in highly complex social environments, many of our most important decisions are made in the context of social interactions. Simple but sophisticated tasks from a branch of experimental economics known as game theory have been used to study social decision-making in the laboratory setting, and a variety of neuroscience methods have been used to probe the underlying neural systems. This approach is informing our knowledge of the neural mechanisms that support decisions about trust, reciprocity, altruism, fairness, revenge, social punishment, social norm conformity, social learning, and competition. Neural systems involved in reward and reinforcement, pain and punishment, mentalizing, delaying gratification, and emotion regulation are commonly recruited for social decisions. This review also highlights the role of the prefrontal cortex in prudent social decision-making, at least when social environments are relatively stable. In addition, recent progress has been made in understanding the neural bases of individual variation in social decision-making.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Autism: the empathizing-systemizing (E-S) theory.

            The mind-blindness theory of autism spectrum conditions has been successful in explaining the social and communication difficulties that characterize these conditions but cannot explain the nonsocial features (the narrow interests, need for sameness, and attention to detail). A new theory, the empathizing-systemizing (E-S) theory, is summarized, which argues two factors are needed to explain the social and nonsocial features of the condition. This is related to other cognitive theories such as the weak central coherence theory and the executive dysfunction theory. The E-S theory is also extended to the extreme male brain theory as a way of understanding the biased sex ratio in autism. Etiological predictions are discussed, as are the clinical applications arising from the E-S theory.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Fairness versus reason in the ultimatum game.

              In the Ultimatum Game, two players are offered a chance to win a certain sum of money. All they must do is divide it. The proposer suggests how to split the sum. The responder can accept or reject the deal. If the deal is rejected, neither player gets anything. The rational solution, suggested by game theory, is for the proposer to offer the smallest possible share and for the responder to accept it. If humans play the game, however, the most frequent outcome is a fair share. In this paper, we develop an evolutionary approach to the Ultimatum Game. We show that fairness will evolve if the proposer can obtain some information on what deals the responder has accepted in the past. Hence, the evolution of fairness, similarly to the evolution of cooperation, is linked to reputation.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                jkrichma@uci.edu
                Journal
                Sci Rep
                Sci Rep
                Scientific Reports
                Nature Publishing Group UK (London )
                2045-2322
                17 July 2017
                17 July 2017
                2017
                : 7
                : 5533
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Cognitive Sciences, University of California, Irvine, 2201 Social & Behavioral Sciences Gateway Building, Irvine, CA 92697 USA
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0668 7243, GRID grid.266093.8, Department of Computer Science, , University of California, Irvine, ; 3019 Donald Bren Hall, Irvine, CA 92697 USA
                Article
                5933
                10.1038/s41598-017-05933-6
                5514024
                00d78591-1c40-4457-bb29-f748b81dfa7a
                © The Author(s) 2017

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 10 February 2017
                : 6 June 2017
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2017

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article