PSYC 303 / NSCI 355

Social Neuroscience

Spring 2019
MW 4:00-5:15pm

Instructor
Molly J. Crockett, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Psychology
[email protected]
Kirtland Hall 303 (Please email for appointment)

Teaching Fellow
Ryan Carlson
[email protected]
Available during weekly office hours (TBD)

Course description
Humans are fundamentally social. Our brains evolved to distinguish friends from enemies, to
form lasting social bonds, and to build coalitions to compete with other groups. This course will
explore the psychological and neural mechanisms that enable the formation, maintenance and
dissolution of social relationships. We will begin by examining how we form impressions and
decide whether to instigate relationships with others. Next, we will explore how we build
relationships through trust, cooperation, attachment, conflict and reconciliation. Finally, we will
discuss relations between groups and within society at large, including intergroup bias, moral
judgment and decision making. This course necessarily takes a multidisciplinary approach,
integrating perspectives from social and cognitive psychology, neuroscience, evolutionary
biology and behavioral economics.

Course goals
In this course, students will:
1. Learn how the brain represents social information and how our understanding of social
behavior can be advanced through insights into its neural mechanisms.
2. Gain exposure to behavioral and neuroscientific methods typically used to studying
social behavior, and the limitations of those methods.
3. Critically evaluate how our evolved social cognition interacts with modern societal level
developments, such as globalization and advances in technology (e.g. social media).

These goals will be accomplished through reading articles in scientific journals and popular
media outlets, as well as class discussion of the theories, methods, results and conclusions
presented in the articles. Mastery of goals will be demonstrated via participation in class
discussions, a midterm and final exam, and a final paper.

1
Prerequisites
The prerequisite for this course is PSYC110 (AP Psychology with a score of 5 can serve as a
substitute for this). PSYC160 is strongly encouraged but not required. This class is upper
level neuroscience, proceeds at a fast pace, and students unfamiliar with neuroanatomy and
neuroscience methods will find the content to be challenging. If you have not taken PSYC160,
you are required to complete the below primer videos and readings:

Primer Videos
Two lecture videos from PSYC160 on neuroanatomy and physiology: links on Canvas

Primer Readings
Kandel, Eric R., James H. Schwartz, and Thomas M. Jessell, eds. Principles of neural
science. 5th edition, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Ch 1 The Brain and Behavior, pp. 5-10
Ch 2 Nerve Cells, Neural Circuitry, and Behavior, pp. 21-39
Ch 15 The Organization of the Central Nervous System, pp. 337-55
Ch 20 Functional Imaging of Cognition, pp. 426-48

Course requirements
Readings: Students should complete all assigned readings before class. Content from the
readings may appear on exams even if not covered in class.

Reading responses: You will be required to submit five short responses to the readings over the
course of the semester. At least two of these must be submitted before the midterm. Responses
for a given lecture’s readings are due on Canvas by the start of class (i.e., 4pm on the day of the
lecture). In your response, try to identify one or two themes in the readings. Include two to
three specific questions from individual readings and one overall question that applies to all or
most of the readings for that lecture. Each response should be 1-2 paragraphs (approximately
300-500 words). Please do not include direct quotations from the readings in your responses.
The responses will be graded on a 10-point scale. These responses will account for 15% of your
grade.

Grading rubric for reading responses:

10: An exceptionally thoughtful response displaying originality, outstanding analytical

skills, superior command of the studies, lucid and precise expression. Accurately
summarizes the readings and raises original and creative questions about the readings in
connection with one another, perhaps bringing in material from other lectures or related
coursework.

9: Excellent response offering high-level analysis and skilled handling of the studies with
lucid and precise expression. Accurately summarizes the readings and raises original
questions about the readings in connection with one another.

2
 8: Strong response displaying a high standard of analysis, a thorough command of details
of the studies, and clear language. Accurately summarizes the readings and poses
questions that relate to the readings in connection with one another.

7: Good response with an effective analysis and mostly accurate summaries of the
studies. Questions raised may be less original and only relate to studies in isolation
rather than drawing connections. Occasional imprecision in analysis and language.

6: Adequate, if somewhat basic response with mostly accurate summaries of studies and
questions about some of the readings. Writing may be unclear or imprecise.

5 and below: Responses that attempt to connect the readings and show some
understanding, but with major misconceptions and/or omissions. If a response is marked
in this range, detailed feedback will be provided to aid improvement.

Exams: There will be a midterm exam covering all course material and readings up to the date
of the exam, and a final exam covering all course material and readings after the midterm. Each
exam consists of multiple choice as well as short written questions. The midterm will be worth
25% of your grade and the final will be worth 30% of your grade.

Final Paper: Pick a social “app” (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, Tinder, Snapchat, etc.) and evaluate its
design features from the perspective of social neuroscience. How might these design features
activate specific neural mechanisms? What are the behavioral consequences of these design
features? How might these design features be changed to improve social relationships or
promote well-being? The goal of this essay is to encourage you to think critically about how new
technologies interact with our evolved social cognition and the broader consequences of their
design. The essay should engage with the empirical work discussed in the lectures and include
an in-depth discussion of the neural mechanisms activated during the user experience. The
paper will be worth 30% of your grade. Paper format: 2500 words excluding references, double-
spaced, Times New Roman 12-pt font, 1-inch margins. Due date: Friday, May 3 at 5pm

Grading
Your final course grade will be based on your reading responses, two exams and a short paper,
calculated as follows:

Reading responses 15%

Midterm exam25%
Final exam 30%
Paper 30%

Course policies
Laptops and other electronic devices: Recent research shows that laptop use in class interferes
with students’ learning - both the laptop user and other nearby students. Multi-tasking is

3
distracting for everyone, and even when laptops are used solely for note-taking, this results in a
shallower understanding of the material; taking handwritten notes results in a deeper
understanding (and higher test scores). A few examples of such studies are here:
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797614524581, http://www.sciencedirect.c
om/science/article/pii/S0360131506001436, and http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article
/pii/S0360131512002254. Given this research, I recommend that you print the slides in
advance and take notes on them directly.

Absences: Please notify me by email before the class meeting if you are going to miss class for
any reason. For absences known in advance, you should find someone to take notes for you.
Exam questions are primarily based on lecture material which cannot be easily gleaned from the
slides and readings, so it will be difficult to perform well on the exams if you do not attend class.

Late assignments: All assignments are due before the beginning of class on the due date. Late
assignments will not be accepted.

Using Sources and Plagiarism: Make sure you read and fully understand Appropriate
Acknowledgment of Sources and always comply with Yale’s Academic Integrity Policy. Always
give credit where credit is due!

Exceptions: To ensure a consistent and fair policy for all course participants, a Dean’s Excuse is
required for extensions beyond any deadline.

Policy on accommodations for academic disabilities: I encourage students with disabilities,

including "invisible" disabilities like chronic diseases or learning disabilities, to identify
themselves to me after class or during my office hours, prior to the 3rd week of the term.

4
Class schedule & readings
Note: This is a tentative schedule. Readings and topics may change depending on the pace of
class discussion.

Date Topic Readings

1/14 Lecture 1: Introduction No reading assignments

1/16 Lecture 2: Social pages 145-149 of

neuroscience methods http://www.scn.ucla.edu/pdf/Lieberman-Hanbook-2010.pdf

Poldrack, RA. (2006). Can cognitive processes be inferred from

neuroimaging data? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 59-63.

1/18 Lecture 3: The social brain Rushworth, M. F., Mars, R. B., & Sallet, J. (2013). Are there
specialized circuits for social cognition and are they unique to
humans?. Current opinion in neurobiology, 23(3), 436-442.

Parkinson, C., Kleinbaum, A. M., & Wheatley, T. (2018). Similar

neural responses predict friendship. Nature Communications, 9,
332.

1/23 Neuroanatomy & methods This is an optional class session that will review the content
review session from Lectures 1 & 2, and give students the opportunity to ask
more in-depth questions about neuroanatomy and
neuroscience methods. It is essential that students who have
not taken PSYC160 attend this session, as the pace of course
material will pick up for the rest of the course and
comprehension will depend on familiarity with neuroanatomy
and neuroscience methods.

1/28 Lecture 4: First impressions Adolphs, R., Tranel, D., & Damasio, A. R. (1998). The human
amygdala in social judgment. Nature, 393(6684), 470-474.

Todorov, A., Mende-Siedlecki, P., & Dotsch, R. (2013). Social

Judgements from Faces. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 23,
373-380.

1/30 Lecture 5: Mindreading I Keysers, C., & Gazzola, V. (2009). Expanding the mirror: Vicarious
activity for actions, emotions, and sensations. Current Opinion
in Neurobiology, 19(6), 666-671.

Schirmer, A., & Adolphs, R. (2017). Emotion perception from

face, voice, and touch: comparisons and convergence. Trends in
Cognitive Sciences , 21(3), 216-228.

2/4 Lecture 6: Mindreading II Saxe, R., & Kanwisher, N. (2003). People thinking about thinking
people: the role of the temporo-parietal junction in “theory of
mind”. Neuroimage, 19(4), 1835-1842.

Saxe, R., & Young, L. (2013). Theory of Mind: How brains think
about thoughts. The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive

5
 Neuroscience, 2, 204-213.

2/6 Lecture 7: Empathy Zaki, J., & Ochsner, K. N. (2012). The neuroscience of empathy:
progress, pitfalls and promise. Nature neuroscience, 15(5), 675-
680.

Singer, T., Seymour, B., O’Doherty, J., Kaube, H., Dolan, R., &
Frith, C. D. (2004). Empathy for pain involves the affective but
not sensory components of pain. Science, 303, 1157-1162.

2/11 Lecture 8: Empathy & Singer, T., & Klimecki, O. M. (2014). Empathy and
Altruism compassion. Current Biology, 24(18), R875-R878.

Morelli, S. A., Rameson, L. T., & Lieberman, M. D. (2012). The

neural components of empathy: predicting daily prosocial
behavior. Social cognitive and affective neuroscience, 9(1), 39-
47.

2/13 Lecture 9: Altruism & Ruff, C. C., & Fehr, E. (2014). The neurobiology of rewards and
Cooperation values in social decision making. Nature Reviews
Neuroscience, 15(8), 549-562.

Harbaugh, W. T., Mayr, U., & Burghart, D. R. (2007). Neural

responses to taxation and voluntary giving reveal motives for
charitable donations. Science, 316(5831), 1622-1625.

2/18 Lecture 10: Trust & Fairness King-Casas, B., Tomlin, D., Anen, C., Camerer, C. F., Quartz, S. R.,
& Montague, P. R. (2005). Getting to know you: reputation and
trust in a two-person economic exchange. Science, 308(5718),
78-83.

Fliessbach, K., Weber, B., Trautner, P., Dohmen, T., Sunde, U.,
Elger, C. E., & Falk, A. (2007). Social comparison affects reward-
related brain activity in the human ventral
striatum. Science, 318(5854), 1305-1308.

2/20 Lecture 11: Punishment I Seymour, B., Singer, T., & Dolan, R. (2007). The neurobiology of
punishment. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 8(4), 300-311.

Sanfey, A. G., Rilling, J. K., Aronson, J. A., Nystrom, L. E., &

Cohen, J. D. (2003). The neural basis of economic decision-
making in the ultimatum game. Science, 300(5626), 1755-1758.

2/25 Lecture 12: Punishment II Baumgartner, T., Knoch, D., Hotz, P., Eisenegger, C., & Fehr, E.
(2011). Dorsolateral and ventromedial prefrontal cortex
orchestrate normative choice. Nature neuroscience, 14(11),
1468-1474.

Crockett, M.J. (2017). Moral outrage in the digital age. Nature

Human Behaviour.

6
2/27 Lecture 13: Self-control Berkman, E. T., Hutcherson, C. A., Livingston, J. L., Kahn, L. E., &
Guest lecturer: Prof Hedy Inzlicht, M. (2017). Self-control as value-based choice. Current
directions in psychological science, 26(5), 422-428.
Kober
Kober, H., Mende-Siedlecki, P., Kross, E. F., Weber, J., Mischel,
W., Hart, C. L., & Ochsner, K. N. (2010). Prefrontal–striatal
pathway underlies cognitive regulation of craving. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(33), 14811-14816.

Hare, T. A., Camerer, C. F., & Rangel, A. (2009). Self-control in

decision-making involves modulation of the vmPFC valuation
system. Science, 324(5927), 646-648.

3/4 Midterm review session No reading assignments

3/6 Midterm exam No reading assignments

3/9-25 Spring Recess (no classes)

3/26 Lecture 14: Attachment Bartz, J. A. (2016). Oxytocin and the pharmacological dissection
of affiliation. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25,
104-10.

Eisenberger, NI, Master, SL, Inagaki, TK, Taylor, SE, Shirinyan, D,

Lieberman, MD, & Naliboff, BD. (2011). Attachment figures
activate a safety signal-related neural region and reduce pain
experience. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of
the United States of America, 108, 11721-11726.

3/28 Lecture 15: Rejection & grief Eisenberger, N.I. (2015). Social pain and the brain:
Controversies, questions, and where to go from here. Annual
Review of Psychology, 66, 601-629.

4/2 Lecture 16: Social influence Falk, E., & Scholz, C. (in press). Persuasion, influence, and value:
Perspectives from communication and social
neuroscience. Annual Review of Psychology, 69(18).
doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011821

Zaki, J., Schirmer, J., & Mitchell, J. P. (2011). Social influence

modulates the neural computation of value. Psychological
science, 22(7), 894-900.

4/4 Lecture 17: Intergroup Cikara, M., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2014). The neuroscience of
relations intergroup relations: An integrative review. Perspectives on
Psychological Science, 9(3), 245-274.

4/9 Lecture 18: Groups & Kubota, J. T., Banaji, M. R., & Phelps, E. A. (2012). The
morality neuroscience of race. Nature neuroscience, 15(7), 940-948.

Shenhav, A., & Greene, J. D. (2014). Integrative moral judgment:

dissociating the roles of the amygdala and ventromedial
prefrontal cortex. Journal of Neuroscience, 34(13), 4741-4749.

7
4/11 Lecture 19: Moral judgment Young, L, Camprodon, JA, Hauser, M, Pascual-Leone, A, & Saxe,
and decision-making R. (2010). Disruption of the right temporoparietal junction with
transcranial magnetic stimulation reduces the role of beliefs in
moral judgments. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Science of the United States of America, 107, 6753-6758.

Buckholtz, J. W. (2015). Social norms, self-control, and the value

of antisocial behavior. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 3,
122-129.

4/16 Lecture 20: Moral decision- Carlson, R. W., & Crockett, M. J. (2018). The lateral prefrontal
making & psychopathy cortex and moral goal pursuit. Current opinion in psychology.

Blair, R. J. R. (2013). The neurobiology of psychopathic traits in

youths. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 14(11), 786-799.

4/18 Final paper workshop No reading assignments

4/23 Final review session No reading assignments

4/25 Final exam No reading assignments