CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 54Neuroendocrine regulation and behaviorFace Recognition and PerceptionPrimate Behavior and Ecology

Oxytocin enhances gaze-following responses to videos of natural social behavior in adult male rhesus monkeys

Open access
Putnam, P.T., Roman, J.M., Zimmerman, P.E., Gothard, K.M.·2016·Psychoneuroendocrinology
DOI 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2016.05.016PMC PMC5226068
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Gaze following is a basic building block of social behavior that has been observed in multiple species, including primates. The absence of gaze following is associated with abnormal development of social cognition, such as in autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Some social deficits in ASD, including the failure to look at eyes and the inability to recognize facial expressions, are ameliorated by intranasal administration of oxytocin (IN-OT). Here we tested the hypothesis that IN-OT might enhance social processes that require active engagement with a social partner, such as gaze following. Alternatively, IN-OT may only enhance the perceptual salience of the eyes, and may not modify behavioral responses to social signals. To test this hypothesis, we presented four monkeys with videos of conspecifics displaying natural behaviors. Each video was viewed multiple times before and after the monkeys received intranasally either 50 IU of OT or saline. We found that despite a gradual decrease in attention to the repeated viewing of the same videos (habituation), IN-OT consistently increased the frequency of gaze following saccades. Further analysis confirmed that these behaviors did not occur randomly, but rather predictably in response to the same segments of the videos. These findings suggest that in response to more naturalistic social stimuli IN-OT enhances the propensity to interact with a social partner rather than merely elevating the perceptual salience of the eyes. In light of these findings, gaze following may serve as a metric for pro-social effects of oxytocin that target social action more than social perception.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Intranasal oxytocin (IN-OT) increased gaze-following saccades in adult male rhesus monkeys viewing videos of natural conspecific social behavior, even though it did not increase time spent looking at the eyes during videos. The authors argue this supports an effect of oxytocin on active social engagement rather than merely on perceptual salience of the eyes.

Key findings

  • Gaze following was rare but reliable: 465 gaze-following saccades occurred across 3924 video presentations, or 11.85% of presentations (min = 3.94%, max = 20.67%), and they clustered on the same video segments within and across viewers (permutation tests, both p < 0.001).
  • IN-OT increased gaze-following frequency compared with saline: significant treatment effect, F(1,1) = 25.0, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.44, d = 1.77; saline produced a significant decrease interpreted as habituation, F(1,1) = 65.92, p < 0.001.
  • OT also increased overall time viewing the videos, F(1,1) = 15.41, p < 0.001, but gaze following did not correlate with viewing time before treatment, post-saline, or post-OT (Spearman R = 0.204, 0.038, 0.037; all p > 0.05).
  • OT increased time spent viewing eyes in static images, F(1,1) = 5.39, p < 0.05, ηp2 = 0.01, but not in videos, F(1,1) = 0.05, p > 0.05; OT had no effect on saccade peak velocities, F(1,1) = 3.15, p > 0.05.

Methods

  • Four adult male rhesus macaques completed 10 sessions each: 5 with 50 IU nebulized oxytocin and 5 with saline, with treatment administered after the first 3 blocks of videos.
  • Each session used 12 unique 10-s videos of unfamiliar conspecifics displaying threatening, neutral, or appeasing behaviors; videos were viewed 7 times in blocks, with eye position recorded at 240 Hz.
  • Gaze-following saccades were scored manually under blind conditions using established criteria; analyses used two-way ANOVA with treatment and monkey factors, plus permutation tests for co-occurrence and treatment differences.

Limitations

  • The paper states the primary limitation is the small number of subjects (N = 4), though each monkey viewed 840 videos; static images were shown only to 2 of 4 monkeys, and only male monkeys were used, so results may not extend to females.
  • The paper also states that no control videos without social content were presented, so it cannot distinguish whether OT enhances attention to all videos or only social videos; peripheral effects of OT and possible vasopressin-1A receptor binding could not be ruled out.
  • Evident from the text: the small sample limits generalizability, and the static-image eye-looking result is described as an additional control rather than the main result.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2016.05.016

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

14 tests recomputed · 5 with the reported and recomputed p on opposite sides of .05

Claims the paper makes

0 of 31 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingcitation

    Gaze following saccades occurred relatively infrequently, in response to 11.85% (min = 3.94%, max = 20.67%) of video presentations.

    “Replicating previous reports, gaze following saccades occurred relatively infrequently, in response to 11.85% (min = 3.94%, max = 20.67%) of video presentations (Mosher et al., 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Mosher et al., 2011 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Findingown data

    There was no significant interaction between monkey and treatment on gaze following frequency (F(1,3) = 0.98, p = 0.41).

    “No main effect of monkey (F(1,3) = 0.96, p = 0.42) and no significant interaction between monkey and treatment (F(1,3) = 0.98, p = 0.41) was observed.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Inhalation of a nebulized solution of 50 IU OT increased the frequency of gaze following saccades compared to saline inhalation (F(1,1) = 25.0, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.44, d = 1.77).

    “Confirming our hypothesis, inhalation of a nebulized solution of 50 UI OT increased the frequency of gaze following saccades (significant effect of treatment, F(1,1) = 25.0, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.44, d = 1.77) compared to saline inhalation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Gaze following saccades were significantly more likely to occur in response to the same segment of the videos for repeated viewings by the same viewer (p < 0.001).

    “We found that gaze following saccades were significantly more likely to occur in response to the same segment of the videos whether we considered repeated viewings by the same viewer (Permutation test, two-tailed, p < 0.001), or gaze follows from multiple viewers (Permutation test, two-tailed, p < 0.001).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    There was no main effect of monkey on gaze following frequency (F(1,3) = 0.96, p = 0.42).

    “No main effect of monkey (F(1,3) = 0.96, p = 0.42) and no significant interaction between monkey and treatment (F(1,3) = 0.98, p = 0.41) was observed.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 10
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 29

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Gaze following saccades tended to occur in response to the same segment of a video during successive presentations to a given viewer monkey, and also across different viewers.

    “Gaze following saccades tended to occur in response to the same segment of a video during successive presentations of the video to a given viewer monkey, and also across different viewers (Fig. 1).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    465 gaze following saccades were extracted from scanpaths made during the viewing of 3924 videos.

    “We extracted 465 gaze following saccades from scanpaths made during the viewing of 3924 videos.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The perception of these signals is subject to individual differences, as rarely a video segment elicited gaze following reliably in all four subjects.

    “the perception of these signals is subject to individual differences as we rarely identified a video segment that elicited reliably gaze following in all four subjects.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    The results are consistent across subjects.

    “While it is encouraging that the results are consistent across subjects”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    IN-OT enhances the frequency of gaze following saccades without increasing looking time at the eyes.

    “and report the effect of IN-OT in enhancing the frequency of gaze following saccades without increasing looking time at the eyes.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Findingnone given

    The parameters of eye movements in monkeys (including saccade velocity) and humans are highly similar.

    “As we have shown here the parameters of eye movements in monkeys (including saccade velocity) and humans are highly similar.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The dose of 50 IU oxytocin has been used previously for rhesus monkeys.

    “This dose has been used previously used for rhesus monkeys (Dal Monte et al., 2014b; Parr et al., 2013).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Dal Monte et al., 2014b

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Parr et al., 2013 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    Sets of 12 videos were randomly allocated to OT and saline sessions.

    “Sets of 12 videos were randomly allocated to OT and saline sessions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    OT increases reward allocation to a partner monkey.

    “OT also enhances socially reinforced learning (Parr, 2014), and increases reward allocation to a partner monkey (Chang et al., 2012).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Chang et al., 2012 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The neuromodulator oxytocin (OT) improves social deficits in ASD and other disorders accompanied by social deficits.

    “The neuromodulator oxytocin (OT) has been shown to improve social deficits in both ASD and other disorders accompanied by social deficits (Guastella et al., 2010, 2010; Hollander et al., 2002, 2007; Yatawara et al., 2015; Young and Barrett, 2015).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Guastella et al., 2010 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Hollander et al., 2002 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Yatawara et al., 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Gaze following is not unique to humans; it has been described in multiple social species, ranging from birds to humans.

    “Gaze following is not unique to humans; it has been described in multiple social species, ranging from birds to humans as reviewed by Shepherd (2010).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Shepherd (2010)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    All experimenters were blind to the treatment.

    “All experimenters were blind to the treatment.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    OT enhances socially reinforced learning.

    “OT also enhances socially reinforced learning (Parr, 2014), and increases reward allocation to a partner monkey (Chang et al., 2012).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Parr, 2014 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    When administered intranasally, OT increases the time that rhesus monkeys spend viewing the eyes of conspecifics in static images.

    “When administered intranasally, OT increases the time that rhesus monkeys spend viewing the eyes of conspecifics in static images (Dal Monte et al., 2014a; Ebitz et al., 2013) and communicative gesturing in rhesus infants (Simpson et al., 2014).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Dal Monte et al., 2014a

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Ebitz et al., 2013 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Deficits of gaze following are among the symptoms of autism spectrum disorders (ASD).

    “Deficits of gaze following are among the symptoms of autism spectrum disorders (ASD) (Dawson et al., 1998).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dawson et al., 1998 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductcitation

    Gaze follows were scored manually using previously established criteria.

    “Gaze follows were scored manually using previously established criteria (Mosher et al., 2011).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Mosher et al., 2011 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    Manual scoring of gaze following saccades was done blindly, with the scorer unaware of treatment, session, or order of video viewing.

    “Manual scoring of gaze following saccades was done blindly, where the scorer was unaware of the treatment, session, or the order in which the videos were viewed in a session.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    When administered intranasally, OT increases communicative gesturing in rhesus infants.

    “When administered intranasally, OT increases the time that rhesus monkeys spend viewing the eyes of conspecifics in static images (Dal Monte et al., 2014a; Ebitz et al., 2013) and communicative gesturing in rhesus infants (Simpson et al., 2014).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Simpson et al., 2014 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Gaze following saccade velocities were calculated for a subset (n = 202) of randomly selected gaze following saccades, which were manually verified.

    “Gaze following saccade velocities were calculated individually for a subset (n = 202) of randomly selected of gaze following saccades, which were manually verified.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The OT-induced increase in gaze following cannot be explained by an increased attention to the eyes because OT did not increase eye looking in response to the videos.

    “Finally, the OT-induced increase in gaze following cannot be explained by an increased attention to the eyes because OT did not increase eye looking in response to the videos.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Neutral faces with averted gaze, possibly being more ambiguous, prompt both greater arousal and more frequent gaze following saccades due to the viewer's interest in where another monkey is looking.

    “it appears that neutral faces with averted gaze, possibly being more ambiguous, prompt both greater arousal and more frequent gaze following saccades due to the viewer’s interest in the where another monkey is looking.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Only male monkeys were used.

    “Finally, only male monkeys were used”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Increased engagement of the viewer is manifested in the production and reciprocation of facial expressions and, more rarely, in the production of social calls (coos).

    “This increased engagement of the viewer is manifested in the production and reciprocation of facial expressions and, more rarely, in the production of social calls (coos) (Mosher et al., 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Mosher et al., 2011 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Static images were shown only to two of the four monkeys.

    “Static images were shown only to two of the four monkeys.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The effect size can be improved by high number of trials for each subject even if the number of subjects is low.

    “As suggested by Walum et al. (2015), the effect size can be improved by high number of trials for each subject even if the number of subjects is low.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Walum et al., 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Our results appear to lend support to the idea that OT increases social motivation and/or decreases social inhibition.

    “our results appear to lend support to the idea that OT increases social motivation and/or decreases social inhibition.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    In our paradigm, IN-OT also increases viewing the eyes of conspecifics.

    “a previously published finding that in our paradigm IN-OT also increases viewing the eyes of conspecifics (Dal Monte et al., 2014a).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dal Monte et al., 2014a

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    We compensated for the small cohort of subjects by recording large numbers of observations from each subject.

    “We compensated for the small cohort of subjects by recording large numbers of observations from each subject.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The small sample size is justified by the difficulties to carry out these studies in large cohorts of non-human primates.

    “This sample size does not compare favorably to well-powered human studies, but is justified by the difficulties to carry out these studies in large cohorts of non-human primates.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    OT influences the interactive aspect of social behavior rather than modifying some aspect of social perception.

    “further substantiating the claim that OT influences the interactive aspect of social behavior rather than modify some aspect of social perception.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The effects of IN-OT are oftentimes subtle and many studies reporting behavioral effects of IN-OT are indeed underpowered.

    “The effects of IN-OT are oftentimes subtle and many studies reporting behavioral effects of IN-OT are indeed underpowered (Walum et al., 2015).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Walum et al., 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    These results may not extend to female monkeys, as there may be a sex-dependent expression of OXTR in the brain.

    “thus these results may not extend to female monkeys, as there may be a sex-dependent expression of OXTR in the brain (Insel et al., 1993).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Insel et al., 1993 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Neutral images with averted gaze induce more reliably skin conductance responses than appeasing or aggressive facial expressions.

    “an earlier finding indicating that neutral images with averted gaze induce more reliably skin conductance responses than appeasing or aggressive facial expressions (Hollander et al., 2007).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Hollander et al., 2007 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    A larger sample size would clearly lead to stronger conclusions.

    “a larger sample size would clearly lead to stronger conclusions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Previous reports indicate changes in saccade parameters induced by social stimuli.

    “This analysis was justified by previous reports on changes in saccade parameters induced by social stimuli (Xu-Wilson et al., 2009).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Xu-Wilson et al., 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationnone given

    The use of videos as social stimuli added to the growing evidence that natural stimuli, albeit more difficult to control, elicit natural behaviors that are quantifiable and robust.

    “the use of videos as social stimuli added to the growing evidence that natural stimuli, albeit more difficult to control, elicit natural behaviors that are quantifiable and robust.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Gaze following is one step closer to spontaneous, natural social behavior than looking at the eyes.

    “Gaze following is a basic form of social interaction and a fundamental building block of theory of mind, and as such is one step closer to spontaneous, natural social behavior than looking at the eyes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Gaze following is a basic form of social interaction and a fundamental building block of theory of mind.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    This behavior can be readily elicited and studied in the laboratory because eye movements are relatively easy to record and quantify.

    “This behavior can be readily elicited and studied in the laboratory because eye movements are relatively easy to record and quantify.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
38 of 38

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Gaze following saccades are a manifestation of active social engagement/propensity to interact with a social partner, rather than merely a perceptual response.

    “Gaze following is an expression of social engagement, a behavior that indicates an explicit interest in where others are looking.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The four adult male rhesus monkeys studied are representative of adult male rhesus monkeys generally.

    “Behavioral data was collected from four adult male rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta): G, Z, U, and R.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The gaze-following behavior of rhesus monkeys is a valid model for human social engagement and for pro-social effects of oxytocin.

    “The absence of gaze following is associated with abnormal development of social cognition, such as in autism spectrum disorders (ASD).”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Gaze following is a basic form of social interaction and a fundamental building block of theory of mind.

    “Gaze following is a basic form of social interaction and a fundamental building block of theory of mind”
4 of 4

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?

Statistics that don’t add up

Each reported p-value recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom.

  • Inconsistent p-value across alpha = .05: F(1,1) = 7.56, p < .05

    Major

    The paper reports p < .05 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .222. The two fall on opposite sides of alpha = .05. The check cannot tell whether the statistic or the p-value is the misprint.

    Reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .222

  • Inconsistent p-value across alpha = .05: F(1, 1) = 5.39, p < .05

    Major

    The paper reports p < .05 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .259. The two fall on opposite sides of alpha = .05. The check cannot tell whether the statistic or the p-value is the misprint.

    Reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .259

  • Inconsistent p-value across alpha = .05: F(1, 1) = 19.56, p < .001

    Major

    The paper reports p < .001 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .142. The two fall on opposite sides of alpha = .05. The check cannot tell whether the statistic or the p-value is the misprint.

    Reported p < .001 · recomputed p = .142

  • Inconsistent p-value across alpha = .05: F(1,1) = 65.92, p < .001

    Major

    The paper reports p < .001 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .078. The two fall on opposite sides of alpha = .05. The check cannot tell whether the statistic or the p-value is the misprint.

    Reported p < .001 · recomputed p = .078

  • Inconsistent p-value across alpha = .05: F(1,1) = 15.41, p < .001

    Major

    The paper reports p < .001 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .159. The two fall on opposite sides of alpha = .05. The check cannot tell whether the statistic or the p-value is the misprint.

    Reported p < .001 · recomputed p = .159

  • Inconsistent p-value: F(1,3) = 1.79, p = .15

    Minor

    The paper reports p = .15 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .273. The check cannot tell whether the statistic or the p-value is the misprint.

    Reported p = .15 · recomputed p = .273

6 of 6

Statistics recomputed

Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.

  • Doesn’t add upF(1, 1) = 7.56reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .222The two fall on opposite sides of .05

    “F(1,1) = 7.56, p < .05”

  • Doesn’t add upF(1, 1) = 65.92reported p < .001 · recomputed p = .078The two fall on opposite sides of .05

    “F(1,1) = 65.92, p < .001”

  • Doesn’t add upF(1, 1) = 15.41reported p < .001 · recomputed p = .159The two fall on opposite sides of .05

    “F(1,1) = 15.41, p < .001”

  • Doesn’t add upF(1, 1) = 5.39reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .259The two fall on opposite sides of .05

    “F(1, 1) = 5.39, p < .05”

  • Doesn’t add upF(1, 1) = 19.56reported p < .001 · recomputed p = .142The two fall on opposite sides of .05

    “F(1, 1) = 19.56, p < .001”

  • Doesn’t add upF(1, 3) = 1.79reported p = .15 · recomputed p = .273

    “F(1,3) = 1.79, p = .15”

  • ConsistentF(1, 1) = 25reported p < .001 · recomputed p = .126

    “F(1,1) = 25.0, p < .001”

    The paper states an exact test

  • ConsistentF(1, 3) = 0.96reported p = .42 · recomputed p = .399

    “F(1,3) = 0.96, p = .42”

    The paper states an exact test

  • ConsistentF(1, 3) = 0.98reported p = .41 · recomputed p = .395

    “F(1,3) = 0.98, p = .41”

    The paper states an exact test

  • ConsistentF(1, 1) = 0.05reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .860

    “F(1,1) = 0.05, p > .05”

  • ConsistentF(1, 1) = 1.8reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .408

    “F(1,1) = 1.8, p > .05”

  • ConsistentF(1, 1) = 0.68reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .561

    “F(1,1) = 0.68, p > .05”

  • ConsistentF(1, 3) = 173.5reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 3) = 173.5, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 1) = 3.15reported p > .05 · recomputed p = .327

    “F(1, 1) = 3.15, p > .05”

14 of 14

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Two different effect sizes are reported for gaze following

    Minor

    The results report d = 1.77 for the treatment effect, while the discussion describes the study's gaze-following effect size as d = 1.6. Rounding 1.77 to one decimal place would give 1.8, not 1.6.

1 of 1

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 57 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Putnam, P. T., Roman, J. M., Zimmerman, P. E., & Gothard, K. M.
Affiliations
University of Arizona (US)
Corresponding author
Putnam, P.T.
ORCID
Venue
Psychoneuroendocrinology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-10
Volume
72
Pages
47-53
ISSN
0306-4530 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.psyneuen.2016.05.016
PMC
PMC5226068
OpenAlex
W2413350634
Cited by
53
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 3
FWCI
12.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Psychoneuroendocrinology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • University of Arizona
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (P50MH100023)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
Keywords
oxytocin, gaze following, rhesus monkeys, social cognition, autism spectrum disorder, intranasal administration, social behavior, gaze, habituation, prosocial behavior
MeSH terms
Animals, Eye Movements, Macaca mulatta, Male, Neuropeptides, Oxytocin, Social Perception, Visual Perception

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-08.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-08.

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