The Strength of Apathy
By: Adeline Sauer
In the story of David and Goliath, David’s craftiness overcomes his disadvantage versus the giant. Some think that the same process happens in life, that those initially disadvantaged often become stronger than their more privileged counterparts because they must overcome more challenges. A recent Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) study challenges this belief, as the researchers found that children from lower socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds showed less sensitivity to reward than children from higher SES backgrounds. This lack of motivational power derived from reward could be seen as a weakness in our competitive society. But what if this disposition is not a sign of passivity but of strength? Maybe the “Davids” of our society prove their strength as a toughened way of reacting to the world around them.
In the 2024 MIT study, which appeared in the Journal of Neuroscience, researchers looked at how high and low SES adolescents differed in their responses to reward. MIT researchers noted that “disparities in SES lead to unequal access to financial and social support...” This means that individuals of a lower SES face more inequalities in terms of health distribution, resource distribution, and quality of life; while their higher SES counterparts are awarded extra opportunities. Alexandra Decker and her colleagues hypothesized that these SES disparities would influence how individuals would react to rewards.
The researchers asked 114 boys and girls between the ages of 12 and 14 representing different SES levels (determined by household income and education level of the parents) to participate in a guessing game. They had to guess whether a number that was going to be revealed would be higher or lower than five. If they guessed correctly, they were rewarded with a dollar but if they guessed incorrectly, they lost 50 cents. The participants’ responses were measured behaviorally as well as physically through Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI), which observes brain activity in the striatum, a part of the brain associated with reward.
During periods where participants earned a multitude of rewards, their behavioral responses quickened, as they rushed to continue their winning streak. This was shown by increased striatum activation in the fMRI scan. However, comparing the responses between higher and lower SES backgrounds revealed that adolescents from lower SES backgrounds showed less striatum activation. This suggests that their brains are less receptive to fluctuations in reward over time, having a “dampened” response to prize winning.
This response is quite interesting, as someone with a lower SES has less access to resources and opportunities, and one would expect that when presented with a reward, their brain response would be stronger. However, the results from the study provide different findings with important social implications. If you are in an environment in which rewards are scarce, your brain becomes less sensitive to these rewards as time goes on. You may be less hopeful about getting access to rewarding resources and opportunities, lessening your brain’s response to incentives even more. If you are in an environment where rewards are frequent, your brain is more responsive to these rewards. More consistent rewards continually reinforce behavior and it may be deduced that your environment’s ability to provide secure prizes motivates you, almost like a high, keeping your brain sensitivity to reward active.
During periods of scarce rewards in the study, participants tended to take longer to respond after a correct guess. Perhaps to savor their winnings or attempt to increase their performance. However, lower-SES adolescents did not slow down as much as higher-SES adolescents after a rare reward. Maybe these individuals were experiencing a sense of hopelessness, since their environment had already dampened their response to rewards, decreasing their motivation to attain a reward after a correct answer, according to one of the researchers. Whereas a higher-SES adolescent may thrive off their reward “high”, savoring each question they get right and putting in immense effort to get that reward and experience that sensation again (indicated by a higher striatum activation).
This means that a lower-SES adolescent who shows a low reward sensitivity due to their environment is less likely to pursue reward. With this “reduced reward pursuit,” the individual is less likely to experience pleasure and satisfaction in their experiences, which diminishes their brain’s reward sensitivity even more. Since the striatum is linked to reward processing, decision-making, social interactions, and motor movements, it can be assumed that when the striatum’s activity is diminished, these movements and cognitive tasks are not operating at their full capacity. A full striatum lesion inhibits the striatum even further and can even lead to depression or obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). MIT focused more on striatum activation rather than striatum lesions, but a less active striatum could indicate signs of depression or OCD, both of which may reinforce a lower-SES individual’s “reduced reward pursuit.” A lower-SES individual without a striatum lesion may not experience depression and OCD to the extent that those with a lesion do, but they are closer to experiencing these disorders than individuals of higher SES. This sheds light on the importance of the striatum’s influence on certain behaviors, especially within differences in SES.
Perhaps these lower SES individuals are merely proving their ability to adapt. As Malcolm Gladwell observed in David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits, and the Art of Battling Giants, “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.” These lower SES individuals are used to more environmental stressors than their higher SES counterparts and are better able to adjust to the world around them. By adjusting one’s brain to become less attuned to rewards, one is proving strength and willpower. These rewards are short-term temptations, and by not reacting or even resisting them, one displays self-discipline and self-control. It has been shown that accepting emotions and thoughts and reducing reactions to negative mental experiences can help one attain better psychological health. So, the low SES participants’ behavior could perhaps be seen as a protective measure against their stressful environment, as they are better able to withstand stressors.
Rather than showing that low SES individuals are less motivated by reward, this study may indicate that those with low SES may have an advantage when it comes to focusing on what is important and pushing them to stay aligned with longer term goals. This strength can help offset any hardships and stressors experienced in their environment. This could explain why David was so successful in defeating Goliath and provides an inspirational example of how individuals can overcome adversity through mental resilience.
published XX/XX/2024