The neuropeptide oxytocin (OT) has been associated with a broad range of human behaviors, particularly in the domain of social cognition, and is being discussed to play a role in a range of psychiatric disorders. Studies using the Reading The Mind In The Eyes Test (RMET) to investigate the role of OT in mental state recognition reported inconsistent outcomes. The present study applied a randomized, double-blind, cross-over design, and included measures of serum OT. Twenty healthy males received intranasal placebo or OT (24 IU) before performing the RMET. Frequentist and Bayesian analyses showed that contrary to previous studies (Domes et al., 2007; Radke & de Bruijn, 2015), individuals performed worse in the OT condition compared to the placebo condition (p = 0.023, Cohen’s d = 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.08, 1.02], BF10 = 6.93). OT effects did not depend on item characteristics (difficulty, valence, intensity, sex) of the RMET. Furthermore, OT serum levels did not change after intranasal OT administration. Given that similar study designs lead to heterogeneous outcomes, our results highlight the complexity of OT effects and support evidence that OT might even interfere with social cognitive abilities. However, the Bayesian analysis approach shows that there is only moderate evidence that OT influences mind-reading, highlighting the need for larger-scale studies considering the discussed aspects that might have led to divergent study results.
Oxytocin (OT) has been extensively studied with regard to its socio-cognitive and -behavioral effects. Its potential as a therapeutic agent is being discussed for a range of neuropsychiatric conditions. However, there is limited evidence of its effects on non-social cognition in general and decision-making in particular, despite the importance of these functions in neuropsychiatry. Using a crossover/within-subject, blinded, randomized design, we investigated for the first time if intranasal OT (24 IU) affects decision-making differently depending on outcome predictability/ambiguity in healthy males. The Iowa Gambling Task (IGT) and the Cambridge Risk Task (CRT) were used to assess decision-making under low outcome predictability/high ambiguity and under high outcome probability/low ambiguity, respectively. After administration of OT, subjects performed worse and exhibited riskier performance in the IGT (low outcome predictability/high ambiguity), whereas they made borderline-significant less risky decisions in the CRT (high outcome probability/low ambiguity) as compared to the control condition. Decision-making in healthy males may therefore be influenced by OT and adjusted as a function of contextual information, with implications for clinical trials investigating OT in neuropsychiatric conditions.
ZUSAMMENFASSUNGObwohl Dissoziation einer der ältesten Forschungsgegenstände der Psychiatrie darstellt, bleibt sie bis heute ein vage definiertes und mannigfaltiges Konstrukt. Ausgeprägte dissoziative Symptome sind für eine Subgruppe von Patienten mit Borderline-Persönlichkeitsstörung (BPS) und posttraumatischer Belastungsstörung (PTBS) charakteristisch und von hoher klinischer Relevanz mit Prävalenzen von 19–34 % bei BPS und bis zu 60 % bei PTBS. Insbesondere Veränderungen der psychischen Integrität mit einer Entfremdung von Selbst und Umwelt (Derealisation/Depersonalisation) gehen mit einer ausgeprägteren BPS- und PTBS-Symptomatik sowie riskanten Verhaltensweisen wie Selbstverletzung und Suizidalität einher. Dissoziative Symptome können nach dem aktuellen Kenntnisstand als eine unwillkürliche und automatische maladaptive Form der Emotionsregulation eingestuft werden, bei welcher subjektiv eine Distanz zu internalen oder externalen bedrohlichen Ereignissen hergestellt wird, die aber objektiv mit einer erhöhten Stressreaktion und autonomer Erregung aufzutreten scheint. Insbesondere bei der BPS wirken sich dissoziative Symptome negativ auf das Behandlungsergebnis aus, während die konkrete Adressierung von Dissoziationen beispielsweise durch Psychoedukation, Achtsamkeit oder Fertigkeitentraining Therapieerfolge verbessert.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.