IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0011153.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

No Association between Oxytocin Receptor (OXTR) Gene Polymorphisms and Experimentally Elicited Social Preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Coren L Apicella
  • David Cesarini
  • Magnus Johannesson
  • Christopher T Dawes
  • Paul Lichtenstein
  • Björn Wallace
  • Jonathan Beauchamp
  • Lars Westberg

Abstract

Background: Oxytocin (OXT) has been implicated in a suite of complex social behaviors including observed choices in economic laboratory experiments. However, actual studies of associations between oxytocin receptor (OXTR) gene variants and experimentally elicited social preferences are rare. Methodology/Principal Findings: We test hypotheses of associations between social preferences, as measured by behavior in two economic games, and 9 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of the OXTR gene in a sample of Swedish twins (n = 684). Two standard economic games, the dictator game and the trust game, both involving real monetary consequences, were used to elicit such preferences. After correction for multiple hypothesis testing, we found no significant associations between any of the 9 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and behavior in either of the games. Conclusion: We were unable to replicate the most significant association reported in previous research between the amount donated in a dictator game and an OXTR genetic variant.

Suggested Citation

  • Coren L Apicella & David Cesarini & Magnus Johannesson & Christopher T Dawes & Paul Lichtenstein & Björn Wallace & Jonathan Beauchamp & Lars Westberg, 2010. "No Association between Oxytocin Receptor (OXTR) Gene Polymorphisms and Experimentally Elicited Social Preferences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(6), pages 1-8, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0011153
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0011153
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0011153
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0011153&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0011153?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. John P A Ioannidis, 2005. "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(8), pages 1-1, August.
    2. Salomon Israel & Elad Lerer & Idan Shalev & Florina Uzefovsky & Mathias Riebold & Efrat Laiba & Rachel Bachner-Melman & Anat Maril & Gary Bornstein & Ariel Knafo & Richard P Ebstein, 2009. "The Oxytocin Receptor (OXTR) Contributes to Prosocial Fund Allocations in the Dictator Game and the Social Value Orientations Task," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(5), pages 1-10, May.
    3. John PA Ioannidis & Nikolaos A Patsopoulos & Evangelos Evangelou, 2007. "Heterogeneity in Meta-Analyses of Genome-Wide Association Investigations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(9), pages 1-7, September.
    4. 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.
    5. Forsythe Robert & Horowitz Joel L. & Savin N. E. & Sefton Martin, 1994. "Fairness in Simple Bargaining Experiments," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 347-369, May.
    6. Gary Charness & Matthew Rabin, 2002. "Understanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(3), pages 817-869.
    7. 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.
    8. Mario Cleves, 1999. "Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium test and allele frequency estimation," Stata Technical Bulletin, StataCorp LP, vol. 8(48).
    9. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, 2002. "Why Social Preferences Matter -- The Impact of Non-Selfish Motives on Competition, Cooperation and Incentives," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(478), pages 1-33, March.
    10. Berg Joyce & Dickhaut John & McCabe Kevin, 1995. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 122-142, July.
    11. Urs Fischbacher & Simon Gaechter, 2008. "Heterogeneous Social Preferences and the Dynamics of Free Riding in Public Good Experiments," TWI Research Paper Series 27, Thurgauer Wirtschaftsinstitut, Universität Konstanz.
    12. Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, "undated". "Why Social Preferences Matter - The Impact of Non-Selfish Motives on Competition," IEW - Working Papers 084, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    13. Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J., 1996. "Altruism in Anonymous Dictator Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 181-191, October.
    14. David Cesarini & Christopher T. Dawes & Magnus Johannesson & Paul Lichtenstein & Björn Wallace, 2009. "Genetic Variation in Preferences for Giving and Risk Taking," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(2), pages 809-842.
    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. Matthijs J H M van der Loos & Cornelius A Rietveld & Niina Eklund & Philipp D Koellinger & Fernando Rivadeneira & Gonçalo R Abecasis & Georgina A Ankra-Badu & Sebastian E Baumeister & Daniel J Benjami, 2013. "The Molecular Genetic Architecture of Self-Employment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(4), pages 1-15, April.
    2. Anna Dreber & David Rand & Nils Wernerfelt & Justin Garcia & Miguel Vilar & J. Lum & Richard Zeckhauser, 2011. "Dopamine and risk choices in different domains: Findings among serious tournament bridge players," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 19-38, August.
    3. Wernerfelt, Nils Christian & Rand, David Gertler & Lum, J. Koji & Zeckhauser, Richard Jay & Dreber, Anna & Garcia, Justin, 2011. "The Dopamine Receptor D4 Gene (DRD4) and Self-Reported Risk Taking in the Economic Domain," Scholarly Articles 5347066, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    4. Matthijs Loos & Philipp Koellinger & Patrick Groenen & Cornelius Rietveld & Fernando Rivadeneira & Frank Rooij & André Uitterlinden & Albert Hofman & A. Thurik, 2011. "Candidate gene studies and the quest for the entrepreneurial gene," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 269-275, October.
    5. Songfa Zhong & Mikhail Monakhov & Helen P Mok & Terry Tong & Poh San Lai & Soo Hong Chew & Richard P Ebstein, 2012. "U-Shaped Relation between Plasma Oxytocin Levels and Behavior in the Trust Game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(12), pages 1-9, December.
    6. Verbeke, W. & Bagozzi, R.P. & van den Berg, W.E. & Lemmens, A., 2013. "Polymorphisms of the OXTR Gene to explain why sales professionals love to help customers," Other publications TiSEM c1303435-9d7f-4cc9-9fe4-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Vanessa Mertins & Andrea B. Schote & Jobst Meyer, 2013. "Variants of the Monoamine Oxidase A Gene (MAOA) Predict Free-riding Behavior in Women in a Strategic Public Goods Experiment," IAAEU Discussion Papers 201302, Institute of Labour Law and Industrial Relations in the European Union (IAAEU).
    8. Chew, Soo Hong & Ebstein, Richard P. & Zhong, Songfa, 2013. "Sex-hormone genes and gender difference in ultimatum game: Experimental evidence from China and Israel," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 28-42.
    9. Jonathan P. Beauchamp & David Cesarini & Magnus Johannesson & Matthijs J. H. M. van der Loos & Philipp D. Koellinger & Patrick J. F. Groenen & James H. Fowler & J. Niels Rosenquist & A. Roy Thurik & N, 2011. "Molecular Genetics and Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(4), pages 57-82, Fall.

    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. Matteo M. Galizzi & Daniel Navarro-Martinez, 2019. "On the External Validity of Social Preference Games: A Systematic Lab-Field Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 976-1002, March.
    2. Erik O. Kimbrough & Alexander Vostroknutov, 2016. "Norms Make Preferences Social," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 608-638, June.
    3. Thomas Buser, 2011. "Hormones and Social Preferences," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 11-046/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    4. Buser, Thomas, 2012. "Digit ratios, the menstrual cycle and social preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 457-470.
    5. Banuri’s, Sheheryar & de Oliveira, Angela C.M. & Eckel, Catherine C., 2019. "Care provision: An experimental investigation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 615-630.
    6. 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.
    7. Jeffrey Milyo & Jennifer M. Mellor & Lisa Anderson, 2005. "Did the Devil Make Them Do It? The Effects of Religion and Religiosity in Public Goods and Trust Games," Working Papers 0512, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
    8. Smith, Vernon L., 2010. "Theory and experiment: What are the questions?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 3-15, January.
    9. Buser, Thomas & Cappelen, Alexander & Gneezy, Uri & Hoffman, Moshe & Tungodden, Bertil, 2021. "Competitiveness, gender and handedness," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    10. Marie-Laure Cabon-Dhersin & Nathalie Etchart-Vincent, 2012. "The puzzle of cooperation in a game of chicken: an experimental study," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 65-87, January.
    11. Thomas Buser, 2010. "Handedness predicts Social Preferences: Evidence connecting the Lab to the Field," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 10-119/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    12. Robert Oxoby, 2013. "Paretian dictators: constraining choice in a voluntary contribution game," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 125-138, June.
    13. Lisa Anderson & Jennifer Mellor & Jeffrey Milyo, 2010. "Did the Devil Make Them Do It? The Effects of Religion in Public Goods and Trust Games," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(2), pages 163-175, May.
    14. Jürgen Fleiß & Kurt A. Ackermann & Eva Fleiß & Ryan O. Murphy & Alfred Posch, 2020. "Social and environmental preferences: measuring how people make tradeoffs among themselves, others, and collective goods," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 28(3), pages 1049-1067, September.
    15. John, Katrin & Thomsen, Stephan L., 2017. "Gender Differences in the Development of Other-Regarding Preferences," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-607, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    16. Eckel, Catherine & Gintis, Herbert, 2010. "Blaming the messenger: Notes on the current state of experimental economics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 109-119, January.
    17. Buser, Thomas & Cappelen, Alexander & Gneezy, Uri & Hoffman, Moshe & Tungodden, Bertil, 2020. "Competitiveness, gender and handedness: a large- sample intercultural study," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 2/2020, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics.
    18. Brülhart, Marius & Usunier, Jean-Claude, 2004. "Verified Trust: Reciprocity, Altruism and Noise in Trust Games," CEPR Discussion Papers 4758, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Simon Gaechter, 2014. "Human Pro-Social Motivation and the Maintenance of Social Order," CESifo Working Paper Series 4729, CESifo.
    20. Wilson, Bart J., 2008. "Language games of reciprocity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 365-377, November.

    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:pone00:0011153. 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.