Cited by 74Neuroendocrine regulation and behaviorAction Observation and SynchronizationFace Recognition and Perception

Oxytocin improves mentalizing – Pronounced effects for individuals with attenuated ability to empathize

Feeser, Melanie, Fan, Yan, Weigand, Anne, Hahn, Adam, Gärtner, Matti, Böker, Heinz, Grimm, Simone, Bajbouj, Malek·2015·Psychoneuroendocrinology

Abstract

The ability to predict the behavior of others based on their mental states is crucial for social functioning. Previous studies have provided evidence for the role of Oxytocin (OXT) in enhancing the ability to mentalize. It has also been demonstrated that the effect of OXT seems to strongly depend on socio-cognitive skills with more pronounced effects in individuals with lower socio-cognitive skills. Although recent studies indicate that mentalizing is related to empathy, no study has yet examined whether the effects of OXT on mentalizing depend on the ability to empathize. 71 male participants participated in a double-blind, between-subjects, placebo-controlled experiment. The Reading the Mind in the Eye Test (RMET) was used to investigate mentalizing abilities. We analyzed the effect of OXT on easy and difficult items of the RMET depending on differential empathy scores of the participants as assessed with the Empathy Quotient (EQ). Our results showed that OXT improves mentalizing for difficult but not for easy items. We generally observed increased mentalizing accuracy in participants with higher empathy scores. Importantly, however, whereas the performance in participants with higher empathy scores was comparable in both OXT and placebo condition, OXT specifically enhanced mentalizing accuracy in participants with lower empathy scores. Our findings suggest that OXT enhances mentalizing abilities. However, we also demonstrate that not all participants benefited from OXT application. It seems that the effects of OXT strongly depend on baseline social-cognitive skills such as empathy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2014.12.015

Cites

81 of 81 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Feeser, M., Fan, Y., Weigand, A., Hahn, A., Gärtner, M., Böker, H., Grimm, S., & Bajbouj, M.
Affiliations
  • Stiftung Charité (DE)
  • University of Cologne (DE)
  • University of Zurich (CH)
Corresponding author
Feeser, Melanie
Venue
Psychoneuroendocrinology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-03
Volume
53
Pages
223-232
ISSN
0306-4530 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2084783440
Cited by
74
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8
FWCI
16.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychoneuroendocrinology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
Keywords
oxytocin, mentalization, theory of mind, empathy, social cognition, Empathy Quotient, placebo effect, individual differences
MeSH terms
Administration, Intranasal, Adult, Double-Blind Method, Empathy, Humans, Male, Oxytocics, Oxytocin, Random Allocation, Social Perception, Young Adult, Theory of Mind

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