CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 15Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAttachment and Relationship DynamicsEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior

Executive control and faithfulness: Only long-term romantic relationships require prefrontal control

Ueda, Ryuhei, Yanagisawa, Kuniaki, Ashida, Hiroshi, Abe, Nobuhito·2018·Experimental Brain Research
DOI 10.1007/s00221-018-5181-y
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Individuals in the early stages of a romantic relationship generally express intense passionate love toward their partners. This observation allows us to hypothesize that the regulation of interest in extra-pair relationships by executive control, which is supported by the function of the prefrontal cortex, is less required in individuals in the early stages of a relationship than it is in those who are in a long-term relationship. To test this hypothesis, we asked male participants in romantic relationships to perform a go/no-go task during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), which is a well-validated task that can measure right ventrolateral prefrontal cortex (VLPFC) activity implicated in executive control. Subsequently, the participants engaged in a date-rating task in which they rated how much they wanted to date unfamiliar females. We found that individuals with higher right VLPFC activity better regulated their interest in dates with unfamiliar females. Importantly, this relationship was found only in individuals with long-term partners, but not in those with short-term partners, indicating that the active regulation of interest in extra-pair relationships is required only in individuals in a long-term relationship. Our findings extend previous findings on executive control in the maintenance of monogamous relationships by highlighting the role of the VLPFC, which varies according to the stage of the romantic relationship.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00221-018-5181-y

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In one study, the right vlPFC and the posterior dmPFC increased activation during the devaluation of attractive individuals, with right vlPFC activation correlated with participants' level of investment in their relationship.

    “The right vlPFC and the posterior dmPFC increased activation during the devaluation of attractive individuals, with right vlPFC activation correlated with participants’ level of investment in their relationship [162,163].”

    From The Neurobiology of Love and Pair Bonding from Human and Animal Perspectives (2023) · cites this paper as [163]

  • Humans maintain bonds by devaluing the attractiveness of potential partners once in a romantic relationship; this relies on proper executive control and is diminished in the presence of enhanced cognitive load.

    “Humans also maintain bonds by devaluing the attractiveness of potential partners once in a romantic relationship; however, this relies on proper executive control and is diminished in the presence of enhanced cognitive load (Figure 2e).”

    From The Neurobiology of Love and Pair Bonding from Human and Animal Perspectives (2023) · cites this paper as [163]

  • The vlPFC is involved in emotion regulation and executive function, and its recruitment in devaluation is seen in long-term, but not new, romantic relationships.

    “The vlPFC is involved in emotion regulation and executive function, and its recruitment in devaluation is seen in long-term, but not new, romantic relationships [163].”

    From The Neurobiology of Love and Pair Bonding from Human and Animal Perspectives (2023) · cites this paper as [163]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Ueda, R., Yanagisawa, K., Ashida, H., & Abe, N.
Affiliations
  • Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JP)
  • Kyoto University (JP)
Corresponding author
Ueda, Ryuhei
ORCID
Venue
Experimental Brain Research
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2018-01-17
Volume
236
Issue
3
Pages
821-828
ISSN
  • 0014-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1106
DOI
10.1007/s00221-018-5181-y
OpenAlex
W2788474454
Cited by
15
References
64
Citations by year
2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 2
FWCI
0.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Experimental Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Uehiro Foundation on Ethics and Education
  • JSPS KAKENHI (JP17J01776)
  • ImPACT Program of the Council for Science, Technology and Innovation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Keywords
executive function, ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, romantic relationships, long-term relationships, short-term relationships, extra-pair mating, monogamy, passion, go/no-go task, relationship stages
MeSH terms
Adult, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Love, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Self Concept, Sexual Behavior, Sexual Partners, Prefrontal Cortex, Young Adult, Executive Function

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review