Abstract

Witnessing another person's suffering elicits vicarious brain activity in areas active when we ourselves are in pain. Whether this activity influences prosocial behavior remains debated. Here participants witnessed a confederate express pain via a reaction of the swatted hand or via a facial expression and could decide to reduce that pain by donating money. Participants donate more money on trials in which the confederate expressed more pain. EEG shows that activity of the SI hand region explains variance in donation; TMS shows that altering this activity interferes with the pain-donation coupling only when pain is expressed by the hand and HD-tDCS that altering SI activity also interferes with pain perception. These experiments show vicarious somatosensory activations contribute to prosocial decision-making and suggest they do so by helping transform observed reactions of affected body-parts into accurate perceptions of pain that are necessary for decision making.

Data availability

fMRI and EEG data have been deposited in Zenodo. Source data files have been provided for all figures

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Selene Gallo

    Social Brain Lab, Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Riccardo Paracampo

    Social Brain Lab, Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Laura Müller-Pinzler

    Social Brain Lab, Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Mario Carlo Severo

    Social Brain Lab, Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7403-819X
  5. Laila Blömer

    Social Brain Lab, Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Carolina Fernandes-Henriques

    Social Brain Lab, Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Anna Henschel

    Social Brain Lab, Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Balint Kalista Lammes

    Social Brain Lab, Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Tatjana Maskaljunas

    Social Brain Lab, Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Judith Suttrup

    Social Brain Lab, Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4034-1534
  11. Alessio Avenanti

    Department of Psychology, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1139-9996
  12. Christian Keysers

    Social Brain Lab, Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Valeria Gazzola

    Social Brain Lab, Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Amsterdam, Netherlands
    For correspondence
    v.gazzola@nin.knaw.nl
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0324-0619

Funding

Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (VIDI: 452-14-015)

  • Valeria Gazzola

Brain and Behavior Research Foundation (NARSAD young investigator 22453)

  • Valeria Gazzola

H2020 European Research Council (ERC-StG-312511)

  • Christian Keysers

Cogito Foundation (R-117/13)

  • Alessio Avenanti

Fundação Bial (298/16)

  • Alessio Avenanti

Cogito Foundation (14-139-R)

  • Alessio Avenanti

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Human subjects: All studies have been approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.Project identifiers:2016-BC-73942016-BC-71302016-PSY-64852014-EXT-34762014-EXT-3432All participants received monetary compensation and gave their informed consent for participation in the study.

Copyright

© 2018, Gallo et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 5,561
    views
  • 745
    downloads
  • 71
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Selene Gallo
  2. Riccardo Paracampo
  3. Laura Müller-Pinzler
  4. Mario Carlo Severo
  5. Laila Blömer
  6. Carolina Fernandes-Henriques
  7. Anna Henschel
  8. Balint Kalista Lammes
  9. Tatjana Maskaljunas
  10. Judith Suttrup
  11. Alessio Avenanti
  12. Christian Keysers
  13. Valeria Gazzola
(2018)
The causal role of the somatosensory cortex in prosocial behaviour
eLife 7:e32740.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32740

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32740

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Jun Sun, Francisca Rojo-Cortes ... Alicia Hidalgo
    Research Article

    Experience shapes the brain as neural circuits can be modified by neural stimulation or the lack of it. The molecular mechanisms underlying structural circuit plasticity and how plasticity modifies behaviour are poorly understood. Subjective experience requires dopamine, a neuromodulator that assigns a value to stimuli, and it also controls behaviour, including locomotion, learning, and memory. In Drosophila, Toll receptors are ideally placed to translate experience into structural brain change. Toll-6 is expressed in dopaminergic neurons (DANs), raising the intriguing possibility that Toll-6 could regulate structural plasticity in dopaminergic circuits. Drosophila neurotrophin-2 (DNT-2) is the ligand for Toll-6 and Kek-6, but whether it is required for circuit structural plasticity was unknown. Here, we show that DNT-2-expressing neurons connect with DANs, and they modulate each other. Loss of function for DNT-2 or its receptors Toll-6 and kinase-less Trk-like kek-6 caused DAN and synapse loss, impaired dendrite growth and connectivity, decreased synaptic sites, and caused locomotion deficits. In contrast, over-expressed DNT-2 increased DAN cell number, dendrite complexity, and promoted synaptogenesis. Neuronal activity modified DNT-2, increased synaptogenesis in DNT-2-positive neurons and DANs, and over-expression of DNT-2 did too. Altering the levels of DNT-2 or Toll-6 also modified dopamine-dependent behaviours, including locomotion and long-term memory. To conclude, a feedback loop involving dopamine and DNT-2 highlighted the circuits engaged, and DNT-2 with Toll-6 and Kek-6 induced structural plasticity in this circuit modifying brain function and behaviour.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Josse Poppinga, Nolan J Barrett ... Jan RT van Weering
    Research Article

    Sorting nexin 4 (SNX4) is an evolutionary conserved organizer of membrane recycling. In neurons, SNX4 accumulates in synapses, but how SNX4 affects synapse function remains unknown. We generated a conditional SNX4 knock-out mouse model and report that SNX4 cKO synapses show enhanced neurotransmission during train stimulation, while the first evoked EPSC was normal. SNX4 depletion did not affect vesicle recycling, basic autophagic flux, or the levels and localization of SNARE-protein VAMP2/synaptobrevin-2. However, SNX4 depletion affected synapse ultrastructure: an increase in docked synaptic vesicles at the active zone, while the overall vesicle number was normal, and a decreased active zone length. These effects together lead to a substantially increased density of docked vesicles per release site. In conclusion, SNX4 is a negative regulator of synaptic vesicle docking and release. These findings suggest a role for SNX4 in synaptic vesicle recruitment at the active zone.