Sharing Opinions Feels at Least as Good as Earning Money

Divulging personal details activated the reward center of subjects' brains, a feeling for which they were willing to sacrifice money. Sophie Bushwick reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

If you enjoy sharing all your likes and dislikes on Facebook, you’re definitely not alone: research finds that broadcasting personal opinions gives people the same sense of reward as earning money. The study is in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. [Diana I. Tamir and Jason P. Mitchell, "Disclosing information about the self is intrinsically rewarding"]

Study subjects had their brains scanned while they either talked about their opinions or judged the beliefs of another. And sharing their own point of view stimulated more activity in the reward-processing parts of the subjects’ brains.

In another experiment, participants got to choose among reporting their own opinion, judging someone else's opinion or answering a true or false question. And for each choice, they could earn varying amounts of money.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Rather than maximize their winnings by answering the questions that were worth the most cash, people preferred to talk about themselves—even though they sacrificed an average of 17 percent of their potential earnings to do it. For the participants, sharing personal information was its own reward.

Which means that people like comedian Patton Oswalt, who tweets photos of what he's having for lunch, probably feel like a million bucks.

—Sophie Bushwick

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
 

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe