"Lie to me"-Oxytocin impairs lie detection between sexes

The neural basis of smile authenticity judgments and the potential modulatory role of the oxytocin receptor gene (OXTR)

Accurate perception of genuine vs. posed smiles is crucial for successful social navigation in humans. While people vary in their ability to assess the authenticity of smiles, little is known about the specific biological mechanisms underlying this variation. We investigated the neural substrates of smile authenticity judgments using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). We also tested a preliminary hypothesis that a common polymorphism in the oxytocin receptor gene (OXTR) rs53576 would modulate the behavioral and neural indices of accurate smile authenticity judgments. A total of 185 healthy adult participants (Neuroimaging arm: N = 44, Behavioral arm: N = 141) determined the authenticity of dynamic facial expressions of genuine and posed smiles either with or without fMRI scanning. Correctly identified genuine vs. posed smiles activated brain areas involved with reward processing, facial mimicry, and mentalizing. Activation within the inferior frontal gyrus and dorsomedial prefrontal cortex correlated with individual differences in sensitivity (d') and response criterion (C), respectively. Our exploratory genetic analysis revealed that rs53576 G homozygotes in the neuroimaging arm had a stronger tendency to judge posed smiles as genuine than did A allele carriers and showed decreased activation in the medial prefrontal cortex when viewing genuine vs. posed smiles. Yet, OXTR rs53576 did not modulate task performance in the behavioral arm, which calls for further studies to evaluate the legitimacy of this result. Our findings extend previous literature on the biological foundations of smile authenticity judgments, particularly emphasizing the involvement of brain regions implicated in reward, facial mimicry, and mentalizing.

An ingroup disadvantage in recognizing micro-expressions

Micro-expression is a fleeting facial expression of emotion that usually occurs in high-stake situations and reveals the true emotion that a person tries to conceal. Due to its unique nature, recognizing micro-expression has great applications for fields like law enforcement, medical treatment, and national security. However, the psychological mechanism of micro-expression recognition is still poorly understood. In the present research, we sought to expand upon previous research to investigate whether the group membership of the expresser influences the recognition process of micro-expressions. By conducting two behavioral studies, we found that contrary to the widespread ingroup advantage found in macro-expression recognition, there was a robust ingroup disadvantage in micro-expression recognition instead. Specifically, in Study 1A and 1B, we found that participants were more accurate at recognizing the intense and subtle micro-expressions of their racial outgroups than those micro-expressions of their racial ingroups, and neither the training experience nor the duration of micro-expressions moderated this ingroup disadvantage. In Study 2A and 2B, we further found that mere social categorization alone was sufficient to elicit the ingroup disadvantage for the recognition of intense and subtle micro-expressions, and such an effect was also unaffected by the duration of micro-expressions. These results suggest that individuals spontaneously employ the social category information of others to recognize micro-expressions, and the ingroup disadvantage in micro-expression stems partly from motivated differential processing of ingroup micro-expressions.

Oxytocin Impairs the Recognition of Micro-Expressions of Surprise and Disgust

As fleeting facial expressions which reveal the emotion that a person tries to conceal, micro-expressions have great application potentials for fields like security, national defense and medical treatment. However, the physiological basis for the recognition of these facial expressions is poorly understood. In the present research, we utilized a double-blind, placebo-controlled, mixed-model experimental design to investigate the effects of oxytocin on the recognition of micro-expressions in three behavioral studies. Specifically, in Studies 1 and 2, participants were asked to perform a laboratory-based standardized micro-expression recognition task after self-administration of a single dose of intranasal oxytocin (40 IU) or placebo (containing all ingredients except for the neuropeptide). In Study 3, we further examined the effects of oxytocin on the recognition of natural micro-expressions. The results showed that intranasal oxytocin decreased the recognition speed for standardized intense micro-expressions of surprise (Study 1) and decreased the recognition accuracy for standardized subtle micro-expressions of disgust (Study 2). The results of Study 3 further revealed that intranasal oxytocin administration significantly reduced the recognition accuracy for natural micro-expressions of surprise and disgust. The present research is the first to investigate the effects of oxytocin on micro-expression recognition. It suggests that the oxytocin mainly plays an inhibiting role in the recognition of micro-expressions and there are fundamental differences in the neurophysiological basis for the recognition of micro-expressions and macro-expressions.

Null results of oxytocin and vasopressin administration across a range of social cognitive and behavioral paradigms: Evidence from a randomized controlled trial

Research examining oxytocin and vasopressin in humans has the potential to elucidate neurobiological mechanisms underlying human sociality that have been previously unknown or not well characterized. A primary goal of this work is to increase our knowledge about neurodevelopmental and psychiatric disorders characterized by impairments in social cognition. However, years of research highlighting wide-ranging effects of, in particular, intranasal oxytocin administration have been tempered as the fields of psychology, neuroscience, and other disciplines have been addressing concerns over the reproducibility and validity of research findings. We present a series of behavioral tasks that were conducted using a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled, between-subjects design, in which our research group found no main effects of oxytocin and vasopressin on a host of social outcomes. In addition to null hypothesis significance testing, we implemented equivalence testing and Bayesian hypothesis testing to examine the sensitivity of our findings. These analyses indicated that 47-83% of our results (depending on the method of post-hoc analysis) had enough sensitivity to detect the absence of a main effect. Our results add to evidence that intranasal oxytocin may have a more limited direct effect on human social processes than initially assumed and suggest that the direct effects of intranasal vasopressin may be similarly limited. Randomized controlled trial registration: NCT01680718.

Testing the influence of testosterone administration on men's honesty in a large laboratory experiment

The impact of testosterone on decision-making is a growing literature, with several reports of economically relevant outcomes. Similar to Wibral et al. (2012), we investigate the effects of exogenous testosterone administration on deception in a double-blind placebo controlled study. Participants (N = 242) were asked to roll a die in private and were paid according to their reported roll, which creates the opportunity to lie about the outcome to increase earnings. We find evidence for self-serving lying in both treatment and control groups and a statistically insignificant negative effect (d = −0.17, 95% CI[−0.42, 0.08]) indicating more honest behavior (i.e., lower reports) following testosterone administration. Although insignificant, the direction was the same as in the Wibral et al. study, and the meta-analytic effect of the two studies demonstrates lower reporting (i.e., more honesty) following testosterone (vs. placebo) administration, significant at the 0.05 level (d = −0.27, 95% CI[−0.49, −0.06]). We discuss how our results and methodology compare with Wibral et al. and identify potential causes for differences in findings. Finally, we consider several plausible connections between testosterone and lying that may be further investigated using alternative methodologies.