Joint task performance is facilitated by sharing and integrating each other’s action representations. Research has shown that the amount of this so-called self-other integration depends on situational aspects related to the social context, including differences in the social relationship between co-acting individuals. There are indications that a cooperative relationship facilitates self-other integration while a competitive relationship results in more individualistic task performance. However, findings from previous studies in which the cooperative or competitive element was manipulated during task performance are inconsistent. Therefore, the present study aimed to manipulate the social relationship between two individuals prior to performing a social Simon task. This task is frequently used to measure self-other integration and distinction processes. A mixed-within-and-between-subjects design was used in which three groups of participants performed both a standard Simon task and a social Simon task after having played a Tetris game either individually, in cooperation with a co-actor, or in competition against another participant. Performance on the standard Simon task was not affected by the Tetris manipulation. However, a sustained effect of the induced cooperative versus competitive relationship was found on the social Simon Task. Less self-other integration was found in participants who had first played a competitive Tetris game compared to participants who had played a cooperative or solo version of the game. The current study thus demonstrates that an established cooperative or competitive relationship is sufficient to modulate the degree of self-other integration on subsequent joint task performance. Importantly, by using Tetris, attention to others’ actions was beneficial both during cooperative and competitive game play and can thus not explain the competition-induced reduction of self-other integration.

No abstract

Altered performance monitoring has been demonstrated after administration of different pharmacological compounds and in various clinical populations, such as excessive neurophysiological responses to mistakes in anxiety disorders. Here, a novel social pharmacological approach was applied to investigate whether oxytocin administration (24 IU) enhances performance monitoring for errors that have negative consequences for another individual, so-called social mistakes. Healthy male volunteers (N = 24) participated in a placebo-controlled crossover design. EEG measures were obtained while pairs of participants performed a speeded choice reaction-time task in an individual and social context. Following oxytocin administration, error-related negativity amplitudes were increased for social compared with individual mistakes. This increase was not found in the placebo condition. No effects of oxytocin were present in the individual context. The current study shows that oxytocin enhances performance monitoring specifically for social mistakes. This outcome is in line with a presumed role for oxytocin in salience attribution to social cues and underlines its context-dependency. Combining these processes may thus open up new research avenues and advance our understanding of individual differences in performance monitoring and oxytocin responses from a social neurocognitive, pharmacological and clinical perspective.

Joint decision-making entails that you sometimes have to go along with the other’s choice even though you disagree. In this situation, a resulting negative outcome may, however, elicit a feeling of satisfaction and an impulse to say “I told you so”. Using fMRI, we investigated the neural correlates of this complex process comprised of both positive and negative outcomes. During a social visual search task, 19 participants gave their advice to a co-actor who then made the decision resulting in a mutual loss or gain. This design allowed direct comparisons of situations that resulted in the same monetary outcome but that differed with respect to the correctness of the initial advice of the participant. Increased striatal activations were found for gains compared to losses and for correct compared to incorrect advice. Importantly, ROI analyses also showed enhanced striatum activation for monetary losses that were preceded by correct compared to incorrect advices. The current study therefore suggests that reward-related neural mechanisms may be involved when being right even in situations that end in monetary losses.

BackgroundOxytocin administration may increase attention to emotional information. We hypothesized that this augmented emotional processing might in turn lead to interference on concurrent cognitive tasks. To test this hypothesis, we examined whether oxytocin administration would lead to heightened emotional interference during a working memory paradigm. Additionally, moderating effects of childhood maltreatment were explored.MethodsSeventy-eight healthy males received 24 IU of intranasal oxytocin or placebo in a randomized placebo-controlled double-blind between-subjects study. A working memory task was performed during which neutral, positive, and negative distractors were presented.ResultsThe main outcome observed was that oxytocin did not enhance interference by emotional information during the working memory task. There was a non-significant trend for oxytocin to slow down performance irrespective of distractor valence, while accuracy was unaffected. Exploratory analyses showed that childhood maltreatment was related to lower overall accuracy, but in the placebo condition only. However, the maltreated group sample size was very small precluding any conclusions on its moderating effect.ConclusionsDespite oxytocin’s previously proposed role in enhanced emotional processing, no proof was found that this would lead to reduced performance on a concurrent cognitive task. The routes by which oxytocin exerts its effects on cognitive and social-emotional processes remain to be fully elucidated.