Cited by 106Neuroendocrine regulation and behaviorExperimental Behavioral Economics StudiesEvolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation

Oxytocin infusion increases charitable donations regardless of monetary resources

Barraza, Jorge A., McCullough, Michael E., Ahmadi, Sheila, Zak, Paul J.·2011·Hormones and Behavior

Abstract

This study examined if the prosocial effects of oxytocin (OT) extend from individuals to a generalized other who is in need. Participants played a series of economic games to earn money and were presented with an opportunity to donate a portion of their earnings to charity. OT did not significantly increase the decision to donate, but among the 36% of participants who did donate, people infused with OT were found to donate 48% more to charity than those given a placebo. The amount of money earned in the experiment had no effect on whether or not a donation was made or the size of a donation. This is the first study showing that OT increases generosity in unilateral exchanges directed toward philanthropic social institutions, as opposed to immediate benefits directed at individuals or groups.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.yhbeh.2011.04.008

Cites

31 of 31 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?

  • The positive effects of OT on social cognition may only be observed when the tasks demand a binding relationship in which reward contingencies are congruent between two players, where they form a partnership by becoming stake holders of common interest.

    “The positive effects of OT on social cognition may only be observed when the tasks demand a binding relationship in which reward contingencies are congruent between two players, where they form a partnership by becoming stake holders of common interest (Barraza et al., 2011; Kosfeld et al., 2005; Zak et al., 2007).”
  • Oxytocin administration exerts no significant behavioral change in strangers who share no pre-existing bonding relationship.

    “oxytocin administration exerts no significant behavioral change in strangers who share no pre-existing bonding relationship (Barraza et al., 2011; De Dreu, 2012b; Kosfeld et al., 2005; Zak et al., 2007)”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barraza, J. A., McCullough, M. E., Ahmadi, S., & Zak, P. J.
Affiliations
  • Claremont Graduate University (US)
  • University of Miami (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Corresponding author
Zak, Paul J.
Venue
Hormones and Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-07
Volume
60
Issue
2
Pages
148-151
ISSN
0018-506X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1991219686
Cited by
106
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 9
FWCI
13.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Hormones and Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
John Templeton Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
Keywords
oxytocin, charitable giving, prosocial behavior, generosity, philanthropy, economic games, financial resources, placebo, social institutions
MeSH terms
Administration, Intranasal, Adolescent, Altruism, Charities, Double-Blind Method, Humans, Male, Oxytocin, Resource Allocation, Young Adult

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