Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from BMC Neuroscience and BioMed Central.

This article is part of the supplement: Twentieth Annual Computational Neuroscience Meeting: CNS*2011

Open Access Poster presentation

Gender difference of emotional bias in sharing love

David Nicoladie Tam

Author Affiliations

Department of Biological Sciences, University of North Texas, Denton, TX 76203, USA

BMC Neuroscience 2011, 12(Suppl 1):P328  doi:10.1186/1471-2202-12-S1-P328

The electronic version of this article is the complete one and can be found online at: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2202/12/S1/P328


Published:18 July 2011

© 2011 Tam; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Poster presentation

Having developed a computational model for emotional response (Emotional-Gain Model) [1-4] and a model for fairness (Fairness-Equity Model) [5] that quantified emotional bias and fairness bias, we will address the gender difference between the perception of love. We employed the experimental paradigm called “ultimatum game” to elicit emotional responses to the sharing of love and money. The experimental paradigm essentially asks human subjects to split a sum of money or love such that their emotional response to fairness can be assessed. The results showed that although male and female respond very similarly in their emotional perception and fairness perception, except for the subtle difference as revealed by our Emotional-Gain and Fairness-Equity Models. The results revealed that female tends to recognize the full spectrum of emotions (both positive and negative) while male tends to recognize the positive emotions more often than the negative emotions. Furthermore, female tends to value love much more important than money, whereas male tends to value money more than love at a subconscious level. Both genders are consciously aware of the objectivity but responded subjectively to what they considered as important, with the value system emphasizing more on money for male whereas the value system emphasizes more on love for female. This confirms the emotional bias and fairness bias quantitative by the emotional and fairness models experimentally.

References

  1. Tam D: EMOTION-I Model: A Biologically-Based Theoretical Framework for Deriving Emotional Context of Sensation in Autonomous Control Systems.

    The Open Cybernetics & Systemics Journal 2007, 1:28-46. Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  2. Tam D: EMOTION-II Model: A Theoretical Framework for Happy Emotion as a Self-Assessment Measure Indicating the Degree-of-Fit (Congruency) between the Expectancy in Subjective and Objective Realities in Autonomous Control Systems.

    The Open Cybernetics & Systemics Journal 2007, 1:47-60. Publisher Full Text OpenURL

  3. Tam DN: Computation in Emotional Processing: Quantitative confirmation of proportionality hypothesis for angry unhappy emotional intensity to perceived loss.

    Cognitive Computation, in press. OpenURL

  4. Tam DN: Cognitive perception of happy emotion: proportionality relationship of emotional intensity to the gain/loss-ratio when getting what one wants — an experimental confirmation. (submitted)

  5. Tam DN: Objectivity in subjective perception of fairness: relativity in proportionality relationship with equity by switching frame-of-reference – a fairness-equity model. (submitted)