Katia Rovelli

Background/Objectives: Decision-making under socially evaluative stress engages a dynamic interplay between cognitive control, emotional appraisal, and motivational systems. Contemporary models of multi-level co-regulation posit that these systems operate in reciprocal modulation, redistributing processing resources to prioritise either rapid socio-emotional alignment or deliberate evaluation depending on situational demands. Methods: Adopting a neurofunctional approach, a novel dual-task protocol combining the MetaCognition–Stress Convergence Paradigm (MSCP) and the Social Stress Test Neuro-Evaluation (SST-NeuroEval), a simulated social–evaluative speech task calibrated across progressive emotional intensities, was implemented. Twenty professionals from an HR consultancy firm participated in the study, with concurrent recording of frontal-temporoparietal electroencephalography (EEG) and bespoke psychometric indices: the MetaStress-Insight Index and the TimeSense Scale. Results: Findings revealed that decision contexts with higher socio-emotional salience elicited faster, emotionally guided choices (mean RT difference emotional vs. cognitive: −220 ms, p = 0.026), accompanied by oscillatory signatures (frontal delta: F(1,19) = 13.30, p = 0.002; gamma: F(3,57) = 14.93, p ≤ 0.001) consistent with intensified socio-emotional integration and contextual reconstruction. Under evaluative stress, oscillatory activity shifted across phases, reflecting the transition from anticipatory regulation to reactive engagement, in line with models of phase-dependent stress adaptation. Across paradigms, convergences emerged between decision orientation, subjective stress, and oscillatory patterns, supporting the view that cognitive–emotional regulation operates as a coordinated, multi-level system. Conclusions: These results underscore the importance of integrating behavioural, experiential, and neural indices to characterise how individuals adaptively regulate decision-making under socially evaluative stress and highlight the potential of dual-paradigm designs for advancing theory and application in cognitive–affective neuroscience.

This study investigates the relationship between neural and physiological synthonization via comodulation (Synth) in dyadic exchanges centered on negotiation processes. In total, 13 dyads participated in a negotiation task with three phases: Initiation (IP), Negotiation Core (NCP), and Resolution (RP). Electroencephalographic (EEG) frequency bands (i.e., delta, theta, alpha) and autonomic responses (heart rate variability, HRV) were recorded. Synth was analyzed using Euclidean distance (EuDist) for EEG and autonomic indices. Significant Synth in delta, theta, and alpha bands in temporo-central and parieto-occipital regions was observed, indicating social cognitive alignment. HRV Synth was higher during the NCP than IP, suggesting better coordination. Based on this result, a cluster analysis was performed on HRV EuDist to identify distinct groups based on HRV, and eventually personality patterns, that revealed one cluster with higher Synth and reward sensitivity, and another with lower Synth and reward sensitivity. These findings show how neural and autonomic Synth enhances social cognition and emotional regulation.

Communication about moral decision-making involves complex emotional and cognitive processes, especially in critical situations. This study adopted a hyperscanning paradigm to explore neural convergence during moral negotiation. Twenty-six healthy young adults (mean age = 23.59 years; 16 women, 10 men), with no neurological or psychiatric conditions, were paired into 13 same-gender dyads at the Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore. Each dyad discussed a medical moral dilemma while their electrophysiological (EEG) activity was simultaneously recorded. Participants were first categorized according to their Dominant Reasoning Profile (DRP) (cognitive or affective), and subsequently convergence in DRP within the dyads was established. EEG band dissimilarities within each dyad were analyzed across frontal, temporo-central, and parieto-occipital regions. The results revealed significantly greater dissimilarity in frontal delta-band activity compared to parieto-occipital areas, regardless of the dyad’s DRP. Such results might suggest different emotional and motivational reactions between the two individuals, reflecting a broader gap in how the moral decision-making process was interpreted and internalized by each member, despite their DRP. The EEG hyperscanning paradigm proves useful in the study and understanding of the neural mechanisms involved in social interaction about morally sensitive decisions and provides novel insights into dyadic brain dynamics.

Background: This study investigates the electrophysiological (EEG) correlates underlying negotiation dynamics in dyads engaged in a shared decision-making process. Methods: Using EEG hyperscanning, we examined single-brain and inter-brain neural activity in 26 participants (13 dyads) during a structured negotiation task. The participants, selected for their group-oriented decision-making preference, discussed a realistic group decisional scenario while their EEG activity was recorded. EEG frequency bands (delta, theta, alpha, beta, and gamma) were analyzed and Euclidean Distances were computed for measuring dissimilarity at the inter-brain neural level. Results: At the single-brain level, the results show increased delta and theta power in frontal regions, reflecting emotional engagement and goal-directed control, alongside heightened beta and gamma activity in parieto-occipital areas, linked to cognitive integration and decision-monitoring during the negotiation process. At the inter-brain neural level, we observed significant dissimilarity in frontal delta activity compared to temporo-central and parieto-occipital one, suggesting that negotiation involves independent cognitive regulation within the members of the dyads rather than complete neural synchrony. Conclusions: These findings highlight the dual role of negotiation as both a cooperative and cognitively demanding process, requiring emotional alignment and strategic adaptation. This study advances our understanding of the neurophysiological bases of negotiation and provides insights into how inter-brain dynamics shape collaborative decision-making.