Cited by 379Neuroendocrine regulation and behaviorOlfactory and Sensory Function StudiesFace Recognition and Perception

A critical review of the influence of oxytocin nasal spray on social cognition in humans: Evidence and future directions

Graustella, Adam J., MacLeod, Colin·2012·Hormones and Behavior

Abstract

The past eight years of research has demonstrated that oxytocin nasal spray has a significant impact on human social cognition. The aim of this review is to provide critical comment on the literature using an information-processing framework. We provide a summary of fundamental assumptions of information-processing models and highlight an impressive range of consistent findings that demonstrate the impact of oxytocin nasal spray on social information processing. These findings include that oxytocin nasal spray improves the early conceptual detection of affect from social cues and improves the accurate appraisal of affect from social cues at elaborate and strategic levels of processing. There is some evidence that these effects may be particularly powerful for positive social cues. This review comments on inconsistent results that have been reported. We argue that such inconsistencies can, in part, be explained by variability across experiments in the degree to which potential extraneous confounds have been controlled, the different methods upon which studies assessed cognition, and the extent to which the focus of investigation has been on group-based outcomes. Finally, we argue that sound cognitive experimental methods can provide powerful tools to identify markers of response to oxytocin nasal spray that can be integrated into more complex circuitry models. The identification of robust markers has particular value in predicting behavioral and therapeutic response to intervention. This should now be a major focus for future research. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled Oxytocin, Vasopressin, and Social Behavior.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.yhbeh.2012.01.002

Cites

72 of 72 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
Graustella, A. J., & MacLeod, C.
Affiliations
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • The University of Western Australia (AU)
Corresponding author
Graustella, Adam J.
Venue
Hormones and Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-03
Volume
61
Issue
3
Pages
410-418
ISSN
0018-506X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2060947458
Cited by
379
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 39 · 2014: 54 · 2013: 43 · 2012: 13
FWCI
6.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Hormones and Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UWA Profiles and Research Repository (UWA) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Olfactory and Sensory Function Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
Keywords
oxytocin, social cognition, information processing model, social information processing, vasopressin, social behavior
MeSH terms
Administration, Intranasal, Animals, Attention, Cognition, Communication, Emotions, Facial Expression, Humans, Individuality, Mental Processes, Neural Pathways, Object Attachment, Oxytocin, Psychotherapy, Social Behavior

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