4.5 Article

Does oxytocin affect mind-reading? A replication study

Journal

PSYCHONEUROENDOCRINOLOGY
Volume 60, Issue -, Pages 75-81

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2015.06.006

Keywords

Oxytocin; Mind-reading; Empathy; Replication; Social cognition; RMET

Funding

  1. Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) [451-07-022, 016-135-367]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

One of the most well-known findings in human oxytocin research is its beneficial effect on mind-reading, i.e., inferring others' mental states just from the eye region in the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test (RMET). Previous studies have partially confirmed these improvements and have further shown that they depend both on baseline social-emotional abilities and on specific item characteristics such as difficulty. Following the original design of Domes et al. (2007), the aim of the current study was to replicate and extend previous findings by thoroughly investigating the impact of oxytocin administration on RMET performance. We tested for potential moderation effects involving item difficulty, valence, intensity, sex of poser as well as individual differences in trait empathy measured with the Empathy Quotient (EQ) for a general score and the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) for a multidimensional assessment of cognitive and emotional empathy. Oxytocin did not affect mind-reading, neither in general nor when considering specific item characteristics. An association between oxytocin-induced changes in RMET performance and emotional empathy (the empathic concern scale of the IRI) was evident, with individuals low in emotional empathy showing greater improvement after oxytocin administration compared to placebo. The reproducibility and variability of these and prior findings needs to be addressed in future experiments. As true effects may not replicate across different studies for various reasons, this should not discourage, but encourage further research. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available