IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0046751.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Oxytocin Motivates Non-Cooperation in Intergroup Conflict to Protect Vulnerable In-Group Members

Author

Listed:
  • Carsten K W De Dreu
  • Shaul Shalvi
  • Lindred L Greer
  • Gerben A Van Kleef
  • Michel J J Handgraaf

Abstract

Intergroup conflict is often driven by an individual's motivation to protect oneself and fellow group members against the threat of out-group aggression, including the tendency to pre-empt out-group threat through a competitive approach. Here we link such defense-motivated competition to oxytocin, a hypothalamic neuropeptide involved in reproduction and social bonding. An intergroup conflict game was developed to disentangle whether oxytocin motivates competitive approach to protect (i) immediate self-interest, (ii) vulnerable in-group members, or (iii) both. Males self-administered oxytocin or placebo (double-blind placebo-controlled) and made decisions with financial consequences to themselves, their fellow in-group members, and a competing out-group. Game payoffs were manipulated between-subjects so that non-cooperation by the out-group had high vs. low impact on personal payoff (personal vulnerability), and high vs. low impact on payoff to fellow in-group members (in-group vulnerability). When personal vulnerability was high, non-cooperation was unaffected by treatment and in-group vulnerability. When personal vulnerability was low, however, in-group vulnerability motivated non-cooperation but only when males received oxytocin. Oxytocin fuels a defense-motivated competitive approach to protect vulnerable group members, even when personal fate is not at stake.

Suggested Citation

  • Carsten K W De Dreu & Shaul Shalvi & Lindred L Greer & Gerben A Van Kleef & Michel J J Handgraaf, 2012. "Oxytocin Motivates Non-Cooperation in Intergroup Conflict to Protect Vulnerable In-Group Members," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(11), pages 1-7, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0046751
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0046751
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0046751
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0046751&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0046751?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Kosfeld & Markus Heinrichs & Paul J. Zak & Urs Fischbacher & Ernst Fehr, 2005. "Oxytocin increases trust in humans," Nature, Nature, vol. 435(7042), pages 673-676, June.
    2. Salomon Israel & Ori Weisel & Richard P. Ebstein & Gary Bornstein, 2012. "Oxytocin, but not Vasopressin, Increases both Parochial and Universal Altruism," Discussion Paper Series dp598, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    3. Martin A. Nowak & Corina E. Tarnita & Edward O. Wilson, 2010. "The evolution of eusociality," Nature, Nature, vol. 466(7310), pages 1057-1062, August.
    4. Ahn, T K & Ostrom, Elinor & Shupp, Robert & Walker, James, 2001. "Cooperation in PD Games: Fear, Greed, and History of Play," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 106(1-2), pages 137-155, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vicente Martínez-Tur & Vicente Peñarroja & Miguel A Serrano & Vanesa Hidalgo & Carolina Moliner & Alicia Salvador & Adrián Alacreu-Crespo & Esther Gracia & Agustín Molina, 2014. "Intergroup Conflict and Rational Decision Making," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Mantilla, Cesar, 2014. "Are we more wearful than greedy? Outbounding the incentives to defect in cooperation dilemmas," IAST Working Papers 14-08, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Blanco, Mariana & Engelmann, Dirk & Koch, Alexander K. & Normann, Hans-Theo, 2014. "Preferences and beliefs in a sequential social dilemma: a within-subjects analysis," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 122-135.
    2. Uri Hertz & Maria Kelly & Robb B Rutledge & Joel Winston & Nicholas Wright & Raymond J Dolan & Bahador Bahrami, 2016. "Oxytocin Effect on Collective Decision Making: A Randomized Placebo Controlled Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-16, April.
    3. Anne Corcos & François Pannequin & Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde, 2012. "Aversions to Trust," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 78(3), pages 115-134.
    4. Kimbrough, E.O. & Vostroknutov, A., 2012. "Rules, rule-following and cooperation," Research Memorandum 053, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    5. Som B Ale & Joel S Brown & Amy T Sullivan, 2013. "Evolution of Cooperation: Combining Kin Selection and Reciprocal Altruism into Matrix Games with Social Dilemmas," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(5), pages 1-8, May.
    6. Marco LiCalzi & Roland Mühlenbernd, 2022. "Feature-weighted categorized play across symmetric games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(3), pages 1052-1078, June.
    7. Hamet SARR & Mohamed Ali BCHIR & François COCHARD & Anne ROZAN, 2021. "Is the “average Pigouvian tax” robust to the size of the group of polluters?," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 285-295, September.
    8. Aslihan Akdeniz & Matthijs van Veelen, 2019. "The cancellation effect at the group level," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 19-073/I, Tinbergen Institute.
    9. Daniel Houser & Daniel Schunk & Joachim Winter, 2006. "Trust Games Measure Trust," MEA discussion paper series 06112, Munich Center for the Economics of Aging (MEA) at the Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy.
    10. Peter Kurrild-Klitgaard, 2010. "Exit, collective action and polycentric political systems," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 143(3), pages 339-352, June.
    11. Sun, Qipeng & Cheng, Qianqian & Wang, Yongjie & Li, Tao & Ma, Fei & Yao, Zhigang, 2022. "Zip-merging behavior at Y-intersection based on intelligent travel points," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 593(C).
    12. Tamara Niella & Nicolás Stier-Moses & Mariano Sigman, 2016. "Nudging Cooperation in a Crowd Experiment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(1), pages 1-20, January.
    13. Schniter, E. & Shields, T.W. & Sznycer, D., 2020. "Trust in humans and robots: Economically similar but emotionally different," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    14. Paul J Zak & Angela A Stanton & Sheila Ahmadi, 2007. "Oxytocin Increases Generosity in Humans," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(11), pages 1-5, November.
    15. Giovanni Bartolomeo & Stefano Papa, 2016. "Does collective meditation foster trust and trustworthiness in an investment game?," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 63(4), pages 379-392, December.
    16. Sofianos, Andis, 2022. "Self-reported & revealed trust: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    17. Alexandre Truc & Dorian Jullien, 2023. "A controversy about modeling practices: the case of inequity aversion," Post-Print hal-04719263, HAL.
    18. Lim, Weng Marc, 2018. "Demystifying neuromarketing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 205-220.
    19. Roberto Fumagalli, 2016. "Decision sciences and the new case for paternalism: three welfare-related justificatory challenges," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(2), pages 459-480, August.
    20. Lisa Bruttel & Tim Friehe, 2011. "Path dependence in public-good games," TWI Research Paper Series 67, Thurgauer Wirtschaftsinstitut, Universität Konstanz.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0046751. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.