Acute stress during witnessing injustice shifts third-party interventions from punishing the perpetrator to helping the victim.

Abstract

People tend to intervene in others' injustices by either punishing the transgressor or helping the victim. Injustice events often occur under stressful circumstances. However, how acute stress affects a third party's intervention in injustice events remains open. Here, we show a stress-induced shift in third parties' willingness to engage in help instead of punishment by acting on emotional salience and central-executive and theory-of-mind networks. Acute stress decreased the third party's willingness to punish the violator and the severity of the punishment and increased their willingness to help the victim. Computational modeling revealed a shift in preference of justice recovery from punishment the offender toward help the victim under stress. This finding is consistent with the increased dorsolateral prefrontal engagement observed with higher amygdala activity and greater connectivity with the ventromedial prefrontal cortex in the stress group. A brain connectivity theory-of-mind network predicted stress-induced justice recovery in punishment. Our findings suggest a neurocomputational mechanism of how acute stress reshapes third parties' decisions by reallocating neural resources in emotional, executive, and mentalizing networks to inhibit punishment bias and decrease punishment severity.