Testosterone administration decreases generosity in the ultimatum game

Paul J Zak, Robert Kurzban, Sheila Ahmadi, Ronald S Swerdloff, Jang Park, Levan Efremidze, Karen Redwine, Karla Morgan, William Matzner, Paul J Zak, Robert Kurzban, Sheila Ahmadi, Ronald S Swerdloff, Jang Park, Levan Efremidze, Karen Redwine, Karla Morgan, William Matzner

Abstract

How do human beings decide when to be selfish or selfless? In this study, we gave testosterone to 25 men to establish its impact on prosocial behaviors in a double-blind within-subjects design. We also confirmed participants' testosterone levels before and after treatment through blood draws. Using the Ultimatum Game from behavioral economics, we find that men with artificially raised T, compared to themselves on placebo, were 27% less generous towards strangers with money they controlled (95% CI placebo: (1.70, 2.72); 95% CI T: (.98, 2.30)). This effect scales with a man's level of total-, free-, and dihydro-testosterone (DHT). Men in the lowest decile of DHT were 560% more generous than men in the highest decile of DHT. We also found that men with elevated testosterone were more likely to use their own money punish those who were ungenerous toward them. Our results continue to hold after controlling for altruism. We conclude that elevated testosterone causes men to behave antisocially.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1. In the Ultimatum Game, Decision-Maker…
Figure 1. In the Ultimatum Game, Decision-Maker 1 (DM1) is endowed with $10 and DM2 has no endowment.
DM1 proposes a split of his endowment to DM2 that DM2 can either accept or reject. Accepted proposals are paid to both DMs while rejected proposals cause both DMs to receive nothing. All participants made proposals as DM1s and as DM2s were asked to state their minimum acceptable proposal to elicit their punishment thresholds. After making decisions as DM1 and DM2, the roles were randomized to determine earnings. Both DMs were fully and identically instructed in this task. The subgame perfect equilibrium is for DM1 to offer $1 and for DM2 to accept this.
Figure 2. Values of total T, free…
Figure 2. Values of total T, free T, and DHT before and after Androgel® treatment; all differences p
The blue bar is basal T and the blue plus the red bar is the post-treatment T value (and SE bars). T in every treated subject was higher than baseline. The highest level of total T after treatment was 10.32 pg/ml or a 170% change from baseline; the smallest change in total T was 0.31 pg/ml or a 7% change.
Figure 3. Generosity (UG offer - UG…
Figure 3. Generosity (UG offer - UG punishment threshold) by participants on placebo was $2.15 compared to $1.57 when the same individuals were given Androgel®, a 27% reduction (p = .035; bars in graph are SEs).
More participants on Androgel® relative to placebo showed negative generosity by setting a punishment threshold above than their own offer to DM2 (9.6% vs. 2.9%).
Figure 4. Scale effect of T on…
Figure 4. Scale effect of T on generosity.
T levels and generosity for those on placebo are shown in blue, generosity for those on Androgel® are shown in red. (A) The reduction of generosity for those on Androgel® positively scales with levels of total T, free T and DHT; the relationship for DHT is shown (r = −0.3063, p = 0.0001). Men in the lowest decile of DHT had average generosity of $3.65 compared to generosity of $0.55 for men in the highest decile of DHT (85% lower). (B) The punishment threshold also scales with a man's level of total T, free T and DHT; the relationship for DHT is shown (r = 0.2284, p = 0.0011). Men in the lowest decile of DHT had average punishment threshold of $2.15 compared to a punishment threshold of $4.00 for men in the top decile of DHT (86% higher).

References

    1. Zak PJ. The neurobiology of trust. Sci Am. 2008;298:88–95.
    1. Churchland PS. The impact of neuroscience on philosophy. Neuron. 2008;60:409–411.
    1. Singer T. The neuronal basis of empathy and fairness. Novartis Found Symp. 2007;278:20–30.
    1. Bowles S, Gintis H. Homo reciprocans. Nature. 2002;415:125–128. Brain Injury Resource Center 1998 Anger Inventory. Retrieved August 29, 2007, from .
    1. Book AS, Starzyk KB, Quinsey VL. The relationship between testosterone and aggression: a meta-analysis. Agg Violent Beh. 2001;6:579–599.
    1. Virgin CE, Sapolsky RM. Styles of male social behavior and their endocrine correlates among low-ranking baboons. Am J Primat. 1997;42(1):25–39.
    1. Czoty PW, Gould RW, Nader MA. Relationship between social rank and cortisol and testosterone concentrations in male cynomolgus monkeys (Macaca fascicularis). J Neuroendocrinol. 2009;21:68–76.
    1. Raleigh MJ, McGuire MT, Brammer GL, Yuwiler A. Social and environmental influences on blood serotonin concentrations in monkeys. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1984;41(4):405–410.
    1. Mitani JC, Watts DP. Why do chimpanzees hunt and share meat? Animal Beh. 2001;61:915–924.
    1. Nishida T. Alpha status and agonistic alliance in wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii). Primates. 1983;24(3):318–336.
    1. Dabbs JM, Dabbs MG. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2000. Heroes, rogues, & lovers: testosterone and behavior.
    1. Mehta PH, Josephs RH. Testosterone change after losing predicts the decision to compete again. Horm Beh. 2006;50:684–669.
    1. Burnham TC. High-testosterone men reject low ultimatum game offers. Proc Royal Soc B. 2007;274:2327–2330.
    1. Zak PJ, Borja K, Matzner W T, Kurzban R. The neuroeconomics of distrust: Sex differences in behavior and physiology. Am Ec Rev: Papers Proc. 2005;95(2):360–363.
    1. Harris JH, Rushton HJ, Hampson E, Jackson DN. Salivary testosterone and self-report aggressive and pro-social personal characteristics in men and women. Agg Beh. 1996;22:321–331.
    1. Mazur A, Booth A. Testosterone and dominance in men. Beh Brain Sci. 1998;21:353–397.
    1. Bernhardt PC, Dabbs JM, Jr, Fielden JA, Lutter CD. Testosterone changes during vicarious experiences of winning and losing among fans at sporting events. Physiol Behav. 1998;65:59–62.
    1. O'Carroll RE. Placebo-controlled manipulations of testosterone levels and dominance. Beh Brain Sci. 1998;21(3):382–383.
    1. Granger DA, Shirtcliff EA, Booth A, Kivlighan KT, Schwartz EB. The “trouble” with salivary testosterone. Psychoneuroendocrin. 2004;29:1229–1240.
    1. Tricker R, Casaburi R, Storer TW, Clevenger B, Berman N, et al. The effects of supraphysiological doses of testosterone on angry behavior in healthy eugonadal men-A clinical research center study. J Clinical Endocrin Metab. 1996;81(10):3754–3758.
    1. Yates WR, Perry PJ, MacIndoe J, Holman T, Ellingrod V. Psychosexual effects of three doses of testosterone cycling in normal men. Biol Psychiatry. 1999;45:254–260.
    1. Pope HG, Kouri EM, Hudson JI. Effects of supraphysiologic doses of testosterone on mood and aggression in normal men: A randomized controlled trial. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2000;57:133–140.
    1. Kouri EM, Lukas SE, Pope HG, Oliva PS. Increased aggressive responding in male volunteers following the administration of gradually increasing doses of testosterone cypionate. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1995;40:73–79.
    1. Zak PJ. Neuroeconomics. Philos Trans Royal Soc B. 2004;359:1737–1748.
    1. Swerdloff RS, Wang C, Hines M, Gorski R. Effect of androgens on the brain and other organs during development and aging. Psychoneuroendocrin. 1992;17(4):375–383.
    1. Swerdloff RS, Wang C, Cunningham G, Dobs A, Iranmanesh A, et al. Long-term pharmacokinetics of transdermal testosterone gel in hypogonadal men. J Clinical Endocrin Metab. 2000;85(12):4500–4510.
    1. Fraley RC, Waller NG, Brennan KA. An item response theory analysis of self-report measures of adult attachment. J Personality Soc Psych. 2000;78:350–365.
    1. Davis MH. A multidimensional approach to individual differences in empathy. JSAS Catalog Select Doc Psych. 1980;10:85.
    1. Davis MH. Measuring individual differences in empathy: evidence for a multidimensional approach. J Personality Soc Psych. 1983;44:113–126.
    1. Larsen RJ, Diener E, Emmons RA. Affect intensity and reactions to daily life events. J Personality Soc Psych. 1986;51:803–814.
    1. Snyder M. New York: Freeman and Company; 1987. Public appearances, private realities.
    1. Camerer CF. New Jersey: Princeton University Press; 2003. Behavioral game theory: experiments in strategic interaction.
    1. Zak PJ, Stanton A, Ahmadi S. Oxytocin increases generosity in humans. Public Library of Science ONE. 2007;2(11):e1128.
    1. Sanfey AG, Rilling JK, Aronson JA, Nystrom LE, Cohen JD. The neural basis of economic decision-making in the ultimatum game. Science. 2002;300:1755–1758.
    1. Kosfeld M, Heinrichs M, Zak PJ, Fischbacher U, Fehr E. Oxytocin increases trust in humans. Nature. 2005;435(2):673–676.
    1. Petrie A, Sabin C. Wiley: Blackwell; 2000. Medical statistics at a glance, 2nd edition.
    1. Micceri T. The unicorn, the normal curve, and other improbable creatures. Psychol Bull. 1989;105(1):156–166.
    1. Stonehouse JM, Forrester GJ. Robustness of the t and U tests under combined assumption violations. J Applied Stat. 1998;25(1):63–74.
    1. Takahashi T, Sakaguchi K, Oki M, Hasegawa T. Sex hormonal modulation of hyperbolic discount factor in men. J Neurosci Psych Econ. 2008;1(1):7–16.
    1. Barraza J, Zak PJ. Empathy toward strangers triggers oxytocin release and subsequent generosity. Ann NY Acad Sci. 2009;1167:182–189.
    1. Insel TR, Young L, Witt DM, Crews D. Gonadal steroids have paradoxical effects on brain oxytocin receptors. Journal of Neuroendocrinol. 1993;5(6):619–628.
    1. Arsenijevic Y, Tribollet E. Region-specific effect of testosterone on oxytocin receptor binding in the brain of the aged rat. Brain Res. 1998;785:167–170.
    1. Hermans EJ, Putman P, van Honk J. Testosterone administration reduces empathetic behavior: a facial mimicry study. Psychoneuroendocrin. 2006;31(7):859–866.
    1. Knickmeyer R, Baron-Cohen S, Raggatt P, Taylor K, Hackett G. Fetal testosterone and empathy. Horm Beh. 2006;49(3):282–92.
    1. Viau V. Functional cross-talk between the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal and -adrenal axes. J Neuroendocrin. 2002;14:506–513.
    1. Morhenn VB, Park JW, Piper E, Zak PJ. Monetary sacrifice among strangers is mediated by endogenous oxytocin release after physical contact. Evol Human Beh. 2008;29:375–383.
    1. Evuarherhe O, Leggett JD, Waite EJ, Kershaw YM, Atkinson HC, et al. Organizational role for pubertal androgens on adult hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal sensitivity to testosterone in the male rat. J Physiol. 2009;587:2977–2985.
    1. Knoch D, Pascual-Leone A, Meyer K, Treyer V, Fehr E. Diminishing reciprocal fairness by disrupting the right prefrontal cortex. Science. 2006;314:829–832.
    1. Koenigs M, Tranel D. Irrational economic decision-making after ventromedial prefrontal damage: evidence from the ultimatum game. J Neurosci. 2007;27(4):951–95.

Source: PubMed

3
订阅