The influence of personality traits and brain functional connectivity on social networks

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.01335

Abstract

Abstract:

Humans are social species that are constantly involved in complex relationships, reacting to the actions of others, and intentionally or unintentionally changing our own behavior. Personality traits reflect the behavioral pattern of an individual's response to the environment, which also includes social behavior. In addition, the brain is also an important factor when discussing social networks. The brain provides biological mechanisms for human behavior, while social networks provide external triggers for these behaviors. Linking personality traits and brain activity to social networks can help us better understand the structure of group relationships, improve our understanding of individual human beings, and help us better predict individual social behaviors and find the rules of information transmission in interpersonal relationships.

From the perspective of a network, we collected nine social networks from 94 undergraduate students in the same grade according to their different social needs. We used the graph theory and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging to explore the influence of personality traits on social networks based on individual popularity and closeness between individuals and the relationship between the similarity of brain resting-state functional connectivity and social distance between individuals. Specifically, regression analysis was carried out, with personality traits as the independent variables and the different degrees of social networks as the dependent variables. Then, a correlation analysis was performed for the social distance and similarity of personality traits. Finally, the correlation between the similarity of the brain networks and social distance was calculated.

The results showed that (1) individuals with high conscientiousness were more popular in social networks requiring “trust” traits, while individuals with high agreeableness were more popular in social networks requiring “fun” traits. These findings showed that in the same group, there are different social networks according to social needs, and the popularity of individuals in different social networks was not similar as it will be affected by the corresponding personality traits; (2) In the social networks requiring “shared interests & values”, personality similarity and social distance between individuals were significantly negatively correlated. Personality similarity promotes interpersonal communication between individuals, which may be realized through interpersonal attraction induced by the similarity of values and interests; (3) In the same social network, there is a significantly negative correlation between similarities in functional connections (FCs) and social distance among individuals, and these FCs are mainly concentrated in the frontoparietal task control network and the dorsal attention network. The similarity of resting brain FCs among individuals may promote interpersonal communication, possibly due to the similarity of individuals in cognitive control and environmental processing bias, which increases the interpersonal attraction and shortening the social distance between individuals.

The results revealed the influence of personality traits on the structure of different social networks, the relationship between personality trait similarity among individuals, and the similarity between resting brain networks and social distance, which has important implications for understanding the structure of social networks, the formation rules, and the information transmission rules among them. In addition, this study discussed the relationship between the similarity of resting-state FC and social distance, providing new evidence for studies on brain synchronization in interpersonal communication and brain imaging evidence for the study of the relationship between the similarity of personality traits and social distance.

Key words: social networks, personality traits, resting-state functional connectivity

LI Yiman, LIU Cheng, ZHUANG Kaixiang, HUO Tengbin, XU Pengfei, LUO Yuejia, QIU Jiang. (2021). The influence of personality traits and brain functional connectivity on social networks. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 53(12), 1335-1347.

Figures/Tables 14

References 52

[1]	Alahyane, N., Brien, D. C., Coe, B. C., Stroman, P. W., & Munoz, D. P. (2014). Developmental improvements in voluntary control of behavior: Effect of preparation in the fronto-parietal network? Neuroimage, 98, 103-117. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.03.008 pmid: 24642280
[2]	Berger C. R., & Calabrese, R. J. (1975). Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research, 1, 99-112. doi: 10.1111/hcre.1975.1.issue-2 URL
[3]	Blakemore, S. (2008). The social brain in adolescence. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9(4), 267-277. doi: 10.1038/nrn2353 URL
[4]	Borgatti, S. P., Mehra, A., Brass, D. J., & Labianca, G. (2009). Network analysis in the social sciences. Science, 323, 892-896. doi: 10.1126/science.1165821 pmid: 19213908
[5]	Clore G. L., & Byrne, D. (1974). A reinforcement-affect model of attraction. Foundations of Interpersonal Attraction, 143-170.
[6]	Costa P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Normal personality assessment in clinical practice: The NEO personality inventory. Psychological Assessment, 4(1), 5. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.5 URL
[7]	Ely, R. J., & Thomas, D. A. Cultural diversity at work: The effects of diversity perspectives on work group processes and outcomes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 229-273. doi: 10.2307/2667087 URL
[8]	Falk, E. B., & Bassett, D. S.(2017). Brain and social networks: Fundamental building blocks of human experience. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(9), 674-690. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2017.06.009 doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2017.06.009 URL
[9]	Fassbender, C., Simoes-Franklin, C., Murphy, K., Hester, R., Meaney, J., Robertson, I. H., & Garavan, H. (2006). The role of a right fronto- parietal network in cognitive control. Journal of Psychophysiology, 20(4), 286-296. doi: 10.1027/0269-8803.20.4.286 doi: 10.1027/0269-8803.20.4.286 URL
[10]	Feiler, D. C., & Kleinbaum, A. M. (2015). Popularity, similarity, and the network extraversion bias. Psychological Science, 26(5), 593-603. doi: 10.1177/0956797615569580 doi: 10.1177/0956797615569580 URL
[11]	Fingelkurts, A. A., & Fingelkurts, A. A. (2011). Persistent operational synchrony within brain default-mode network and self-processing operations in healthy participants. Brain and Cognition, 75(2), 79-90. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2010.11.015 doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2010.11.015 pmid: 21172727
[12]	Furler, K., Gomez, V., & Grob, A. (2013). Personality similarity and life satisfaction in couples. Journal of Research in Personality, 47(4), 369-375. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2013.03.002 doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2013.03.002 URL
[13]	Gattis, K. S., Berns, S., Simpson, L. E., & Christensen, A. (2004). Birds of a feather or strange birds? Ties among personality dimensions, similarity, and marital quality. Journal of Family Psychology, 18(4), 564-574. doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.18.4.564 doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.18.4.564 URL
[14]	Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big-Five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4(1), 26. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.26 URL
[15]	Goldin, P. R., Ziv, M., Jazaieri, H., Weeks, J., Heimberg, R. G., & Gross, J. J. (2014). Impact of cognitive-behavioral therapy for social anxiety disorder on the neural bases of emotional reactivity to and regulation of social evaluation. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 62, 97-106. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2014.08.005 doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2014.08.005 URL
[16]	Graziano, W. G., Habashi, M. M., Sheese, B. E., & Tobin, R. M. (2007). Agreeableness, empathy, and helping: A person x situation perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(4), 583-599. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.93.4.583 doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.93.4.583 pmid: 17892333
[17]	Graziano, W. G., & Tobin, R. M. (2010). Agreeableness: Dimension of personality or social desirability artifact?. Journal of Personality, 70(5), 695-728. doi: 10.1111/1467-6494.05021 URL
[18]	Greicius, M. D., Supekar, K., Menon, V., & Dougherty, R. F. (2009). Resting-state functional connectivity reflects structural connectivity in the default mode network. Cereb Cortex, 19(1), 72-78. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhn059 doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhn059 pmid: 18403396
[19]	Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H., & Bell, M. P. (1998). Beyond relational demography: Time and the effects of surface-and deep-level diversity on work group cohesion. Academy of Management Journal, 41(1), 96-107.
[20]	Humbad, M. N., Donnellan, M. B., Iacono, W. G., McGue, M., & Burt, S. A. (2010). Is spousal similarity for personality a matter of convergence or selection? Personality and Individual Differences, 49(7), 827-830. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.07.010 doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.07.010 URL
[21]	Hyon, R., Kleinbaum, A. M., & Parkinson, C. (2019). Social network proximity predicts similar trajectories of psychological states: Evidence from multi-voxel spatiotemporal dynamics. Neuroimage, 116492. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116492 doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116492
[22]	Jaaskelainen, I. P., Pajula, J., Tohka, J., Lee, H. J., Kuo, W. J., & Lin, F. H. (2016). Brain hemodynamic activity during viewing and re-viewing of comedy movies explained by experienced humor. Scientific Reports, 6, 27741. doi: 10.1038/srep27741 doi: 10.1038/srep27741 URL
[23]	Jensen-Campbell, L. A., Adams, R., Perry, D. G., Workman, K. A., Furdella, J. Q., & Egan, S. K. (2002). Agreeableness, extraversion, and peer relations in early adolescence: Winning friends and deflecting aggression. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(3), 224-251. doi: 10.1006/jrpe.2002.2348 doi: 10.1006/jrpe.2002.2348 URL
[24]	Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Graziano, W. G. (2001). Agreeableness as a moderator of interpersonal conflict. Journal of Personality, 69, 2.
[25]	Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Graziano, W. G. (2005). The two faces of temptation: Differing motives for self-control. Merrill-Palmer, 51, 287-314.
[26]	Kaplan, S. C., Levinson, C. A., Rodebaugh, T. L., Menatti, A., & Weeks, J. W. (2015). Social anxiety and the big five personality traits: The interactive relationship of trust and openness. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 44(3), 212-222. doi: 10.1080/16506073.2015.1008032 doi: 10.1080/16506073.2015.1008032 URL
[27]	Klein, K. J., Lim, B.-C., Saltz, J. L., & Mayer, D. M. (2004). How do they get there? An examination of the antecedents of centrality in team networks. Academy of Management Journal, 47(6), 952-963. doi: 10.2307/20159634 doi: 10.2307/20159634
[28]	Landis, B. (2016). Personality and social networks in organizations: A review and future directions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37, S107-S121. doi: 10.1002/job.2004 doi: 10.1002/job.2004 URL
[29]	Maarten, S., Susan, B., & Wim, M. (2007). Similarity in adolescent best friendships: The role of gender. Netherlands Journal of Psychology, 63(2), 42-48. doi: 10.1007/bf03061061 doi: 10.1007/bf03061061 URL
[30]	Massen, J. J. M., & Koski, S. E. (2014). Chimps of a feather sit together: Chimpanzee friendships are based on homophily in personality. Evolution and Human Behavior, 35(1), 1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2013.08.008 doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2013.08.008 URL
[31]	McKinney, A. P. (2013). What lies ahead: Emerging trends in the diversity pipeline among new entrants in the workforce. Journal of Business Diversity, 13(1/2), 83-95.
[32]	McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Reviews, 27, 415-444.
[33]	Morelli, S. A., Leong, Y. C., Carlson, R. W., Kullar, M., & Zaki, J. (2018). Neural detection of socially valued community members. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(32), 8149-8154. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1712811115 URL
[34]	Morelli, S. A., Ong, D. C., Makati, R., Jackson, M. O., & Zaki, J. (2017). Empathy and well-being correlate with centrality in different social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(37), 9843-9847. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1702155114 doi: 10.1073/pnas.1702155114 URL
[35]	Nummenmaa, L., Glerean, E., Viinikainen, M., Jaaskelainen, I. P., Hari, R., & Sams, M. (2012). Emotions promote social interaction by synchronizing brain activity across individuals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(24), 9599-9604. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1206095109 doi: 10.1073/pnas.1206095109 pmid: 22623534
[36]	Parkinson, C., Kleinbaum, A. M., & Wheatley, T. (2018). Similar neural responses predict friendship. Nature Communications, 9(1), 332. doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-02722-7 doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-02722-7 pmid: 29382820
[37]	Power, J. D., Cohen, A. L., Nelson, S. M., Wig, G. S., Barnes, K. A., Church, J. A., … Petersen, S. E. (2011). Functional network organization of the human brain. Neuron, 72(4), 665-678. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.09.006 doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.09.006 URL
[38]	Roberts, B. W., Chernyshenko, O. S., Stark, S., & Goldberg, L. R. (2005). The structure of conscientiousness: An empirical investigation based on seven major personality questionnaires. Personnel Psychology, 58, 103-139. doi: 10.1111/peps.2005.58.issue-1 URL
[39]	Rothbart, M. K., Ahadi, S. A., & Evans, D. E. (2000). Temperament and personality: Origins and outcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(1), 122. pmid: 10653510
[40]	Schaffer, B. S. (2019). Examining reactions to workplace diversity: The role of dissimilarity-attraction in teams. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l'Administration, 36(1), 57-69. doi: 10.1002/cjas.1476 doi: 10.1002/cjas.1476 URL
[41]	Selfhout, M., Burk, W., Branje, S., Denissen, J., van Aken, M., & Meeus, W. (2010). Emerging late adolescent friendship networks and big five personality traits: A social network approach. Journal of Personality, 78(2), 509-538. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00625.x doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00625.x pmid: 20433629
[42]	Sestieri, C., Corbetta, M., Romani, G. L., & Shulman, G. L. (2011). Episodic memory retrieval, parietal cortex, and the default mode network: Functional and topographic analyses. The Journal of Neuroscience, 31(12), 4407-4420. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3335-10.2011 doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3335-10.2011 URL
[43]	Simon, S. S., Varangis, E., & Stern, Y. (2020). Associations between personality and whole-brain functional connectivity at rest: Evidence across the adult lifespan. Brain and Behavior, 10(2), e01515. doi: 10.1002/brb3.1515 doi: 10.1002/brb3.1515
[44]	Vogel, A. C., Miezin, F. M., Petersen, S. E., & Schlaggar, B. L. (2012). The putative visual word form area is functionally connected to the dorsal attention network. Cereb Cortex, 22(3), 537-549. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhr100 doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhr100 URL
[45]	Vogeley, K., & Fink, G. R. (2003). Neural correlates of the first-person-perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(1), 38-42. pmid: 12517357
[46]	Vohs, K. D., & Baumeister, R. F. (2016). Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications. Guilford Publications.
[47]	Wig, G. S. (2017). Segregated systems of human brain networks. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(12), 981-996. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2017.09.006 doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2017.09.006 URL
[48]	Wolfer, R., Cortina, K. S., & Baumert, J. (2012). Embeddedness and empathy: How the social network shapes adolescents' social understanding. Journal of Adolescence, 35(5), 1295-1305. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.04.015 doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.04.015 URL
[49]	Wu, J., Dong, D., Jackson, T., Wang, Y., Huang, J., & Chen, H. (2015). The neural correlates of optimistic and depressive tendencies of self-evaluations and resting-state default mode network. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, 618. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00618 doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00618
[50]	Wu, X. R., He, H., Shi, L., Xia, Y. M., Zuang, K. X., Feng, Q. Y., … Qiu, J. (2019). Personality traits are related with dynamic functional connectivity in major depression disorder: A resting-state analysis. Journal of Affective Disorders, 245, 1032-1042. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2018.11.002 doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2018.11.002 URL
[51]	Yang, W. J., Cun, L. L., Du, X., Yang, J. Y., Wang, Y. Q., Wei, D. T., … Qiu, J. (2015). Gender differences in brain structure and resting-state functional connectivity related to narcissistic personality. Scientific Reports, 5(1). doi: 10.1038/srep10924 doi: 10.1038/srep10924
[52]	Zanto, T. P., & Gazzaley, A. (2013). Fronto-parietal network: flexible hub of cognitive control. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(12), 602-603. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2013.10.001 doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2013.10.001 URL

Social Networks	r	p
Close friends	0.13	0.03
Spend time	-0.02	0.26
Social advice	0.00	0.46
Bad news	0.01	0.33
Good news	0.10	0.04
Support	0.01	0.39
Empathetic	0.07	0.12
Feel positive	0.04	0.16

Social Networks	r	p
Close friends	0.13	0.03
Spend time	-0.02	0.26
Social advice	0.00	0.46
Bad news	0.01	0.33
Good news	0.10	0.04
Support	0.01	0.39
Empathetic	0.07	0.12
Feel positive	0.04	0.16

NO.	Cerebral area	Hemispheres	Brain Network	MNI coordinates			r	p
NO.	Cerebral area	Hemispheres	Brain Network	x	y	z	r	p
22	Precuneus_R	R	Sensory/somatomotor Hand	8	-48	69	0.12	0.04
97	Frontal_Sup_R	R	Default mode	21	27	50	0.15	0.03
101	Frontal_Mid_R	R	Default mode	20	33	42	0.13	0.06
110	Cingulum_Ant_R	R	Default mode	7	37	0	0.19	0.00
124	Lingual_L	L	Default mode	-25	-41	-8	0.17	0.00
126	Fusiform_L	L	Default mode	-32	-39	-15	0.16	0.00
194	Occipital_Mid_R	R	Fronto-parietal Task Control	35	-66	38	0.12	0.02
193	Frontal_Mid_R	R	Fronto-parietal Task Control	29	9	57	-0.16	0.03
204	Angular_R	R	Salience	52	-47	36	-0.13	0.01

NO.	Cerebral area	Hemispheres	Brain Network	MNI coordinates			r	p
NO.	Cerebral area	Hemispheres	Brain Network	x	y	z	r	p
22	Precuneus_R	R	Sensory/somatomotor Hand	8	-48	69	0.12	0.04
97	Frontal_Sup_R	R	Default mode	21	27	50	0.15	0.03
101	Frontal_Mid_R	R	Default mode	20	33	42	0.13	0.06
110	Cingulum_Ant_R	R	Default mode	7	37	0	0.19	0.00
124	Lingual_L	L	Default mode	-25	-41	-8	0.17	0.00
126	Fusiform_L	L	Default mode	-32	-39	-15	0.16	0.00
194	Occipital_Mid_R	R	Fronto-parietal Task Control	35	-66	38	0.12	0.02
193	Frontal_Mid_R	R	Fronto-parietal Task Control	29	9	57	-0.16	0.03
204	Angular_R	R	Salience	52	-47	36	-0.13	0.01

NO.	Cerebral area	Hemispheres	Brain Network	MNI coordinates			r	p
NO.	Cerebral area	Hemispheres	Brain Network	x	y	z	r	p
21	Precentral_R	R	Sensory/somatomotor Hand	26	-21	69	0.10	0.00
34	Postcentral_L	L	Sensory/somatomotor Hand	-21	-34	58	0.12	0.00
39	Paracentral_Lobule_L	R	Sensory/somatomotor Hand	1	-31	58	0.10	0.01
67	Rolandic_Oper_R	R	Auditory	41	-26	21	0.09	0.01
77	Lingual_L	L	Default mode	-12	-41	1	0.12	0.00
82	Temporal_Pole_Sup_R	R	Default mode	44	12	-24	0.09	0.02
97	Frontal_Sup_R	R	Default mode	21	27	50	0.10	0.02
124	Lingual_L	L	Default mode	-25	-41	-8	0.07	0.04
126	Fusiform_L	L	Default mode	-32	-39	-15	0.08	0.02
136	Precuneus_R	R	Memory retrieval	3	-50	48	0.08	0.01
242	Frontal_Inf_Tri_L	L	Ventral attention	-47	21	2	0.07	0.02
251	Precuneus_R	R	Dorsal attention	8	-63	57	0.08	0.03
261	Precentral_L	L	Dorsal attention	-32	-5	53	0.08	0.01