Oxytocin conditions trait-based rule adherence

Abstract

Rules, whether in the form of norms, taboos or laws, regulate and coordinate human life. Some rules, however, are arbitrary and adhering to them can be personally costly. Rigidly sticking to such rules can be considered maladaptive. Here, we test whether, at the neurobiological level, (mal)adaptive rule adherence is reduced by oxytocin—a hypothalamic neuropeptide that biases the biobehavioural approach-avoidance system. Participants (N = 139) self-administered oxytocin or placebo intranasally, and reported their need for structure and approach-avoidance sensitivity. Next, participants made binary decisions and were given an arbitrary rule that demanded to forgo financial benefits. Under oxytocin, participants violated the rule more often, especially when they had high need for structure and high approach sensitivity. Possibly, oxytocin dampens the need for a highly structured environment and enables individuals to flexibly trade-off internal desires against external restrictions. Implications for the treatment of clinical disorders marked by maladaptive rule adherence are discussed.

Low-dose intranasal oxytocin delivered with Breath Powered device modulates pupil diameter and amygdala activity: a randomized controlled pupillometry and fMRI study

“…Indeed, the oxytocin system has been shown to influence a range of non-social animal behaviors including learning [70], location preference [71], and pain tolerance [72]. Human research has also demonstrated that oxytocin administration reduces amygdala activation during pain stimulation [73] and decreases trait-based rule adherence [74]. Despite that fact we did not collect data explicitly reflecting approach-related behaviors, the data in the current study is consistent with increasing evidence that oxytocin increases both social and non-social-approach-related behaviors [64].…”

The Role of Oxytocin in Antisocial Personality Disorders: A Systematic Review of the Literature

“…Fourteen of the studies included male and female participants (27, 29, 33, 37, 40–42, 46, 48, 54, 56, 59, 60, 62). Two studies included only female participants (31, 47).…”

“…Under OT participants violated the rule more often. This was most apparent in individuals who had a high need for structure (46).…”

Rule Following Mitigates Collaborative Cheating and Facilitates the Spreading of Honesty Within Groups

“…Similarly, people differ in cheating rates and their willingness to lie for profit ( Heck et al, 2018 ; Hilbig & Zettler, 2015 ). These disparate findings combined suggest that people systematically differ in the value they derive from abiding by rules and/or the disutility incurred when violating rules ( Gross & De Dreu, 2017 ; Kashy & DePaulo, 1996 ; Kimbrough & Vostroknutov, 2016 , 2018 ). Indeed, others before us have shown that individual differences that are conceptually or empirically related to rule following, such as guilt proneness and honesty–humility, correlate with ethical conduct and shying away from delinquent behavior ( Fleeson et al, 2014 ; Heck et al, 2018 ; Hilbig & Zettler, 2015 ).…”

“…Whether we consider work on obedience to authority ( Milgram, 1963 ), social conformity and norm compliance ( Stubbersfield et al, 2019 ), or adherence to culture-specific rules such as “wait until the light turns green,” or “thou shall not cheat” ( Gelfand et al, 2011 ), people often abide by rules. It has been argued that deviations from rules generate a psychological cost ( Abeler et al, 2014 ; Gross & De Dreu, 2017 ; Kimbrough & Vostroknutov, 2016 , 2018 ; Krupka & Weber, 2013 ) and create a cognitive conflict between what one should and wants to do ( Pfister et al, 2019 ; Schelling, 1984 ).…”