Social status and prenatal testosterone exposure assessed via second-to-fourth digit ratio affect 6–9-year-old children’s prosocial choices

Abstract

Prosocial behaviour (i.e., voluntary behaviour intended to benefit another) seems to be fully developed in children by the age of 6 years. However, questions about which factors modify prosocial behaviour at that age remain understudied. Here we used a resource allocation paradigm to test prosocial behaviour in 6–9-year-old school children. They could decide between a “selfish” (i.e., one sticker for themselves) and a “prosocial” option (i.e., one sticker for themselves and one for the receiver) and we tested whether friendship, social status and prenatal androgen exposure (approximated by the 2nd to 4th digit ratio; 2D:4D) influenced children’s prosocial choices. We found that children behaved prosocially, and that their prosocial tendencies were negatively correlated with prenatal androgen exposure; i.e., children with high 2D:4D ratios (reflecting low prenatal androgen exposure) acted more prosocially than children with low 2D:4D ratios. Further, their social status in the classroom influenced their choices: children with fewer interaction partners chose the “prosocial” option more often than more ‘popular’ children. However, they did so irrespectively of whether they were paired with a recipient or not. Our results highlight the importance of considering social, as well as physiological factors when investigating prosocial behaviour in children.

Targeted helping and cooperation in zoo-living chimpanzees and bonobos

“…The researchers suggested that children did not understand the task's contingencies, which supports the notion that slight differences in design can lead to outcomes of seemingly unprosocial individuals [ 17 ]. This view is further supported by a recent study, in which children acted prosocially when facing each other during the test instead of side-by-side, as was done in previous studies [ 18 ]. Therefore, the ‘prosocial choice paradigm’ in itself might be easily affected by changes in the set-up that may create false negatives.…”

Cognitive reflection, 2D:4D and social value orientation

“…Further, a positive relationship has been shown between young (resp. 11- and 6-to-9—year old) children’s 2D:4D and prosociality in different resource allocation paradigms [28, 29]. As it has been shown that young children have lower impulse control than adults [38], this is again consistent with the idea that reliance on intuition (vs. deliberation) may drive the relationship between low 2D:4D and selfish preferences.…”

Lower Digit Ratio (2D:4D) Indicative of Excess Prenatal Androgen Is Associated With Increased Sociability and Greater Social Capital

“…Furthermore, children with a higher status – as measured in number of friends/interaction partners – choose the prosocial option less often (Horn et al, 2018). In contrast to our data from adults, in which a bigger social capital and a larger social network are associated with lower 2D:4D, in boys the strategies to gain status may still be dysfunctional, as a link with number of friends/interaction partners and 2D:4D was not found (Horn et al, 2018).…”