Evidence Hub

Effect of exogenous testosterone on cooperation depends on personality and time pressure

Bird BM, Geniole SN, Procyshyn TL, Ortiz TL, Carré JM, Watson NV

Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, 2019

400 participants

Abstract

The social heuristic hypothesis posits that human cooperation is an intuitive response that is expressed especially under conditions of time-constraint. Conversely, it proposes that for individuals given an opportunity for reflection, cooperation is more likely to be curtailed by an optimizing process calibrated to maximize individual benefit in a given situation. Notably, the steroid hormone testosterone has also been implicated in intuitive decision-making, including both prosocial and anti-social behaviors, with effects strongest in men with particular dispositional characteristics. This raises the possibility that increased testosterone may augment the effects predicted by the social heuristic hypothesis, particularly among men higher in specific dispositional characteristics (dominance, impulsivity, independent self-construal: high risk for testosterone-induced antisocial behavior). Here, in a testosterone administration study with a relatively large sample of men (N = 400), we test this possibility in a double-blind, placebo-controlled paradigm, with men randomly assigned to play a one-shot public goods game either under time-pressure (forced intuition) or with a time delay (forced reflection). Results revealed that within the placebo group, time-pressure (versus forced delay) increased cooperation among low risk men, but decreased cooperation among high risk men. Testosterone further moderated this pattern by abolishing the time-pressure effect in low risk men and-in…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 400 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free