4.5 Article

Hormonal and neural correlates of prosocial conformity in adolescents

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.dcn.2021.100936

关键词

Dual hormone hypothesis; Prosocial; fMRI; Peer influence; Testosterone; Cortisol

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01DA039923]
  2. National Science Foundation [SES 1459719]
  3. Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Development through the Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill [T32-HD07376]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the impact of the dual hormone hypothesis on adolescent peer conformity behaviors and found that high testosterone with low cortisol was associated with greater conformity to high prosocial peers.
The dual hormone hypothesis, which centers on the interaction between testosterone and cortisol on social behavior, offers a compelling framework for examining the role of hormones on the neural correlates of adolescent peer conformity. Expanding on this hypothesis, the present study explored the interaction between testosterone and cortisol via hair concentrations on adolescents? conformity to peers. During fMRI, 136 adolescents (51 % female) ages 11?14 years (M = 12.32; SD = 0.6) completed a prosocial decision-making task. Participants chose how much of their time to donate to charity before and after observing a low- or highprosocial peer. Conformity was measured as change in behavior pre- to post-observation. High testosterone with low cortisol was associated with greater conformity to high-prosocial peers but not low prosocial peers. Focusing on high prosocial peers, whole-brain analyses indicated greater activation post- vs. pre-observation as a function of high testosterone and low cortisol in regions implicated in social cognition, salience detection, and reward processing: pSTS/TPJ, insula, OFC, and caudate nucleus. Results highlight the relevance of hormones for understanding the neural correlates of adolescents? conformity to prosocial peers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据