No abstract

Oxytocin (OT) subserves various physiological, behavioral, and cognitive processes. This paired with the ability to administer OT with minimal and inconsistent side effects has spurred research to explore its therapeutic potential. Findings from single-dose studies indicate that OT administration may be beneficial, at least under certain circumstances. The state of the field, however, is less clear regarding effects from chronic OT administration, which more closely resembles long-term treatment. To address this gap, this review synthesizes existing findings on the use of chronic OT administration in animal and human work. In addition to detailing the effects of chronic OT administration across different functional domains, this review highlights factors that have contributed to mixed findings. Based on this review, a basic framework of interrelated regulatory functions sensitive to chronic OT administration is offered. The paper also identifies future research directions across different contexts, populations, and outcomes, specifically calling for more systematic and standardized research on chronic OT administration in humans to supplement and expand what is currently known from preclinical work.

Age-related differences in cognition and socioemotional functions, and in associated brain regions, may reduce sensitivity to cues of untrustworthiness, with effects on trust-related decision making and trusting behavior. This study examined age-group differences in brain activity and behavior during a trust game. In this game, participants received "breach-of-trust" feedback after half of the trials. The feedback indicated that only 50% of the monetary investment into their fellow players had resulted in returns. The study also explored the effects of intranasal oxytocin on trust-related decisions in aging, based on suggestions of a modulatory role of oxytocin in response to negative social stimuli and perceptions of trust. Forty-seven younger and 46 older participants selfadministered intranasal oxytocin or placebo, in a randomized, double-blind, between-subjects procedure, before they engaged in the trust game while undergoing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Younger participants invested less into their game partners after breach-of-trust feedback, while older participants showed no significant difference in their investment after breach-of-trust feedback. Oxytocin did not modulate the behavioral effects. However, after breachof-trust feedback, older participants in the oxytocin group showed less activity in the left superior temporal gyrus. In contrast, older participants in the placebo group showed more activity in left superior temporal gyrus after breach of trust. The findings may reflect reduced responsiveness to cues of untrustworthiness in older adults. Furthermore, the modulatory effect of oxytocin on left superior temporal gyrus activity among older adults supports the neuropeptide's age-differential role in neural processes in aging, including in the context of trust-related decision making.

The degree to which people take advice, and the factors that influence advice-taking, are of broad interest to laypersons, professionals, and policy-makers. This meta-analysis on 346 effect sizes from 129 independent datasets (N = 17, 296) assessed the weight of advice in the judge-advisor system paradigm, as well as the influence of sample and task characteristics. Information about the advisor(s) that is suggestive of advice quality was the only unique predictor of the overall pooled weight of advice. Individuals adjusted estimates by 32%, 37%, and 48% in response to advisors described in ways that suggest low, neutral, or high quality advice, respectively. This indicates that the benefits of compromise and averaging may be lost if accurate advice is perceived to be low quality, or too much weight is given to inaccurate advice that is perceived to be high quality. When examining the three levels of perceived quality separately, advice-taking was greater for subjective and uncertain estimates, relative to objective estimates, when information about the advisor was neutral in terms of advice quality. Sample characteristics had no effect on advice-taking, thus providing no evidence that age, gender, or individualism influence the weight of advice. The findings contribute to current theoretical debates and provide direction for future research.

No abstract

Phishing emails constitute a major problem, linked to fraud and exploitation as well as subsequent negative health outcomes including depression and suicide. Because of their sheer volume, and because phishing emails are designed to deceive, purely technological solutions can only go so far, leaving human judgment as the last line of defense. However, because it is difficult to phish people in the lab, little is known about the cognitive and neural mechanisms underlying phishing susceptibility. There is therefore a critical need to develop an ecologically valid lab-based measure of phishing susceptibility that will allow evaluation of the cognitive mechanisms involved in phishing detection. Here we present such a measure based on a task, the Phishing Email Suspicion Test (PEST), and a cognitive model to quantify behavior. In PEST, participants rate a series of phishing and nonphishing emails according to their level of suspicion. By comparing suspicion scores for each email to its real-world efficacy, we find initial support for the ecological validity of PESTphishing emails that were more effective in the real world were more effective at deceiving people in the lab. In the proposed computational model, we quantify behavior in terms of participants' overall level of suspicion of emails, their ability to distinguish phishing from non-phishing emails, and the extent to which emails from the recent past bias their current decision. Together, our task and model provide a framework for studying the cognitive neuroscience of phishing detection.

Aim Previous research has focused on accuracy associated with real and fake news presented in the form of news headlines only, which does not capture the rich context news is frequently encountered in real life. Additionally, while previous studies on evaluation of real and fake news have mostly focused on characteristics of the evaluator (i.e., analytical reasoning), characteristics of the news stimuli (i.e., news source credibility) and the interplay between the two have been largely ignored. To address these research gaps, this project examined the role of analytical reasoning and news source credibility on evaluation of real and fake full-length news story articles. The project considered both accuracy and perceived credibility ratings as outcome variables, thus qualifying previous work focused solely on news detection accuracy. Method We conducted two independent but parallel studies, with Study 2 as a direct replication of Study 1, employing the same design but in a larger sample (Study 1: N = 292 vs. Study 2: N = 357). In both studies, participants viewed 12 full-length news articles (6 real, 6 fake), followed by prompts to evaluate each article’s veracity and credibility. Participants were randomly assigned to view articles with a credible or non-credible source and completed the Cognitive Reflection Test as well as short demographic questions. Findings Consistent across both studies, higher analytical reasoning was associated with greater fake news accuracy, while analytical reasoning was not associated with real news accuracy. In addition, in both studies, higher analytical reasoning was associated with lower perceived credibility for fake news, while analytical reasoning was not associated with perceived credibility for real news. Furthermore, lower analytical reasoning was associated with greater accuracy for real (but not fake) news from credible compared to non-credible sources, with this effect only detected in Study 2. Conclusions The novel results generated in this research are discussed in light of classical vs. naturalistic accounts of decision-making as well as cognitive processes underlying news articles evaluation. The results extend previous findings that analytical reasoning contributes to fake news detection to full-length news articles. Furthermore, news-related cues such as the credibility of the news source systematically affected discrimination ability between real and fake news.

No abstract