Social integration is a major resilience factor for staying healthy. However, the COVID-19-pandemic led to unprecedented restrictions in social life. The consequences of these social lockdowns on momentary well-being are yet not fully understood. We investigated the affective benefit from social interactions in a longitudinal birth cohort. We used two real-time, real-life ecological momentary assessments once before and once during the initial lockdown of the pandemic (N = 70 participants; n~6800 observations) capturing the protective role of social interactions on well-being. Moreover, we used a multimethod approach to analyze ecological assessment data with individual risk and resilience factors, which are promising moderators in the relationship of social behavior, stress reactivity, and affective states (i.e., amygdala volume, neuroticism, polygenic risk for schizophrenia). Social contacts were linked to higher positive affect both during normal times and during the COVID-19-pandemic (beta coefficient = 0.1035), highlighting the beneficial role of social embedding. Interestingly, this relationship was differentially moderated by individual risk and resilience factors. In detail, participants with a larger left amygdala volume (beta coefficient = −0.0793) and higher neuroticism (beta coefficient = −0.0958) exhibited an affective benefit from more social interactions prior to the pandemic. This pattern changed during the pandemic with participants with smaller amygdala volumes and lower neurotic traits showing an affective gain during the pandemic. Moreover, participants with low genetic risk for schizophrenia showed an affective benefit (beta coefficient = −0.0528) from social interactions irrespective of the time point. Our results highlight the protective role of social integration on momentary well-being. Thereby, we offer new insights into how this relationship is differently affected by a person’s neurobiology, personality, and genes under adverse circumstances.

Trust plays a critical role in nearly every aspect of social life. Parental investment theory and social role theory predict that women trust less than men due to a higher sensitivity to risk and betrayal, while men trust more than women to maximize resources and to signal their willingness to lose something. However, the underlying neuropsychological underpinnings for this gender difference are still obscure. In this study, we used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to investigate the neural signatures of gender differences in trust by simultaneously scanning 11 male and 11 female samegender, fixed dyads who played a multi-round binary trust game with varying levels of payoff (low/moderate/high) as an indicator of social risk. Our results showed that men trusted more than women and payoff level moderated the effect of gender on trust. While men trusted the same at all payoff levels, women trusted less with higher payoff levels. This pattern was supported by our neuroimaging finding: men showed a higher activation in the left inferior frontal gyrus (ventrolateral prefrontal cortex) and right precuneus than women, indicating that men exert more effort to inhibit the information of payoff levels and to use self-referencing to infer the strategies of partners with the goal of maximizing profit. Furthermore, men showed equivalent activation in the subgenual anterior cingulate cortex across payoff levels, whereas women showed a decreased activation with increasing payoff level-indicating decreased group bonding with higher risk in women. In conclusion, our results imply that women are more sensitive to social risk while trusting, which has implications for financial interactions, interpersonal relationships, and social involvement.

Background Schizotypy is a putative risk phenotype for psychosis liability, but the overlap of its genetic architecture with schizophrenia is poorly understood. Methods We tested the hypothesis that dimensions of schizotypy (assessed with the SPQ-B) are associated with a polygenic risk score (PRS) for schizophrenia in a sample of 623 psychiatrically healthy, non-clinical subjects from the FOR2107 multi-centre study and a second sample of 1133 blood donors. Results We did not find correlations of schizophrenia PRS with either overall SPQ or specific dimension scores, nor with adjusted schizotypy scores derived from the SPQ (addressing inter-scale variance). Also, PRS for affective disorders (bipolar disorder and major depression) were not significantly associated with schizotypy. Conclusions This important negative finding demonstrates that despite the hypothesised continuum of schizotypy and schizophrenia, schizotypy might share less genetic risk with schizophrenia than previously assumed (and possibly less compared to psychotic-like experiences).