| Literature DB >> 28079166 |
Xiaolei Xu1, Shuxia Yao1, Lei Xu1, Yayuan Geng1, Weihua Zhao1, Xiaole Ma1, Juan Kou1, Ruixue Luo1, Keith M Kendrick1.
Abstract
We normally react to individuals who exclude us socially by either avoiding them or increasing our attempts to interact with them. The neuropeptide oxytocin can promote social bonds and reduce social conflict and we therefore investigated whether it facilitates more positive social responses towards individuals who exclude or include us. In a double-blind, placebo-controlled, between-subject design 77 healthy Chinese male and female participants received intranasal oxytocin (40 IU) or placebo before playing a modified virtual ball-tossing game with three fictitious partners who either showed exclusion, inclusion or neutral behavioral interactions with them. Results showed that both male and female subjects threw the ball more often to individuals who excluded rather than included them, although oxytocin did not alter this or awareness/feelings of exclusion or inclusion. However, when subjects returned a week later males, but not females, in the oxytocin group exhibited an increased liking for, and preference for playing again with, players who had previously excluded them. This oxytocin effect was positively associated with independent traits. Our findings suggest that in a collectivist culture oxytocin may promote the desire of males, but not females, with a stronger independent orientation to rebuild social connections with individuals who have previously excluded them.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28079166 PMCID: PMC5227992 DOI: 10.1038/srep40589
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Questionnaire and rating scores for participants in PLC and OXT group before treatment and after treatment and performing the Cyberball game (mean ± SEM).
| Measurements | Placebo | Oxytocin | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Self-Esteem Scale (SES) | 30.8 ± 0.7 | 32.2 ± 0.6 | −1.51 | 0.135 |
| Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) | 7.5 ± 0.9 | 6.8 ± 0.9 | 0.54 | 0.594 |
| State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI)-State | 38.9 ± 1.5 | 37.1 ± 1.4 | 0.92 | 0.361 |
| State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI)-Trait | 41.4 ± 1.2 | 38.6 ± 1.0 | 1.77 | 0.081 |
| Adult Autism Spectrum Quotient (ASQ) | 21.2 ± 0.7 | 19.5 ± 1.0 | 1.38 | 0.172 |
| Social Provision Scale (SPS) | 48.8 ± 1.0 | 50.4 ± 1.3 | −0.98 | 0.331 |
| Interpersonal Sensitivity Measure (IPSM) | 95.9 ± 1.4 | 94.9 ± 1.2 | 0.57 | 0.568 |
| Cheek and Buss Shyness Scale (RCBSS) | 36.7 ± 1.1 | 34.2 ± 1.5 | 1.35 | 0.182 |
| Positive | 31.2 ± 1.0 | 33.1 ± 0.8 | −1.65 | 0.104 |
| Negative | 20.1 ± 1.0 | 21.1 ± 0.8 | −0.79 | 0.431 |
| Individualism and Collectivism Scale (ICS)-HI | 2.7 ± 0.1 | 2.6 ± 0.1 | 0.76 | 0.450 |
| Individualism and Collectivism Scale (ICS)-VI | 3.2 ± 0.1 | 3.5 ± 0.1 | −1.96 | 0.053 |
| Individualism and Collectivism Scale (ICS)-HC | 2.6 ± 0.1 | 2.4 ± 0.1 | 0.94 | 0.348 |
| Individualism and Collectivism Scale (ICS)-VC | 3.1 ± 0.1 | 3.1 ± 0.1 | 0.07 | 0.947 |
| Positive & Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) | ||||
| Positive | 27.2 ± 1.3 | 27.3 ± 1.2 | −0.02 | 0.982 |
| Negative | 10.7 ± 0.6 | 10.9 ± 0.5 | −0.22 | 0.829 |
| Belonging | 3.96 ± 0.2 | 3.75 ± 0.2 | 0.69 | 0.494 |
| Control | 3.84 ± 0.1 | 3.76 ± 0.2 | 0.27 | 0.786 |
| Self-esteem | 4.94 ± 0.2 | 4.96 ± 0.2 | −0.08 | 0.937 |
| Meaningful-existence | 4.02 ± 0.2 | 3.68 ± 0.2 | 1.34 | 0.184 |
| Mood-bad | 2.95 ± 0.4 | 2.18 ± 0.4 | 1.47 | 0.147 |
| Mood-good | 6.76 ± 0.4 | 6.79 ± 0.3 | −0.07 | 0.946 |
| Mood-sad | 2.76 ± 0.4 | 1.95 ± 0.3 | 1.65 | 0.104 |
| Mood-happy | 6.87 ± 0.3 | 6.82 ± 0.3 | 0.11 | 0.910 |
| Mood-nervous | 3.03 ± 0.4 | 2.44 ± 0.4 | 1.14 | 0.256 |
| Mood-relax | 6.97 ± 0.4 | 7.44 ± 0.4 | −0.91 | 0.366 |
| Mood-exciting | 5.71 ± 0.4 | 5.23 ± 0.4 | 0.90 | 0.374 |
| Mood-drowsy | 3.84 ± 0.4 | 3.62 ± 0.4 | 0.39 | 0.698 |
| Ancillary-enjoy | 6.24 ± 0.3 | 6.44 ± 0.3 | −0.43 | 0.670 |
| Ancillary-angry | 2.82 ± 0.4 | 2.21 ± 0.4 | 1.20 | 0.235 |
| Involved | 7.18 ± 0.3 | 8.00 ± 0.2 | −2.27 | 0.026* |
| Received ball | 4.21 ± 0.2 | 4.10 ± 0.2 | 0.34 | 0.735 |
| Q1- awareness of exclusion (%) | 34.21 ± 0.1 | 28.21 ± 0.1 | 0.56 | 0.575 |
| Q2- feelings of exclusion (1–9) | 2.74 ± 0.3 | 2.26 ± 0.3 | 1.30 | 0.199 |
| Q3- awareness of inclusion (%) | 60.53 ± 0.1 | 64.10 ± 0.1 | −0.32 | 0.750 |
| Q4 – feelings of inclusion (1–9) | 6.08 ± 0.3 | 6.64 ± 0.2 | −1.5 | 0.137 |
Figure 1Histograms show mean ± SEM percentage of ball throws made by the subjects in the combined PLC and OXT groups to players who either excluded or included them or were neutral for (a) male and female subjects combined and (b) separately. (**p < 0.01, *p < 0.05, #p = 0.052).
Figure 2Histograms show mean ± SEM likeability ratings for subjects in OXT and PLC groups for face pictures of excluders, include and neutral players 1 week after the original Cyberball game (**p < 0.01).
Figure 3Histograms show mean ± SEM preference choice for subjects in OXT and PLC groups for face pictures of excluders, includers and neutral players 1 week after the original Cyberball game.
(a) For males and females combined and (b) separately. (**p < 0.01, *p < 0.05, #p < 0.06).
Figure 4Graphs show correlations between horizontal independence scores on the independence and collectivist scale (ICS) and preference for playing again with excluders for male subjects in the OXT and PLC groups.
(**p < 0.01).